Proceedings of
UNESCO Chair Programme on
Cultural Heritage andRisk Management,

INTERNATIONAL TRAINING
COURSE (ITC) on DISASTERRISK MANAGEMENT of
CULTURAL HERITAGE
Ritsumeikan University
2014, 9th year
From 6th to 22nd September 2014,
In Kyoto, Kobe and Minami Sanriku-Cho,Japan
Organized by Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage,
Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH), Kyoto, Japan In Cooperation with
UNESCO World Heritage Centre, ICCROM, ICOMOS / ICORP
Supported by Toyota Foundation “Initiative Program”
Five stories pagoda in Hokan-ji Temple located Buffer Zone of KIyomizu-Dera
World Heritage Site have special sprinkler system.
If fire occur in the wooden town surround the pagoda,
this drencher system can prevent the fire spread to the cultural heritage.

Proceedings of
UNESCO Chair Programme on
Cultural Heritage andRisk Management,

INTERNATIONAL TRAINING
COURSE (ITC) on DISASTERRISK MANAGEMENT of
CULTURAL HERITAGE
Ritsumeikan University
2014, 9th year
From 6th to 22nd September 2014,
In Kyoto, Kobe and Minami SanrikuCho, Japan
Organized by Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural
Heritage, Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH), Kyoto, JapanIn Cooperation with UNESCO World Heritage Centre, ICCROM,
ICOMOS / ICORP
Supported by Toyota Foundation “Initiative Program”

Date of Publication: February 2015
Published by: Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage,
Ritsumeikan University
58 Komatsubara Kita-machi, Kita-ku, Kyoto 603-8341 Japan
In cooperation with: UNESCO World Heritage Centre
ICCROM
ICOMOS / ICORP
Supported by: Toyota Foundation “Initiative Program”
Authors: Participants of ITC2014
Coordinated by: Rohit JIGYASU, Professor, Ritsumeikan University
Naoko Ushitani ITAYA, Associate Professor, Ritsumeikan University
Layout by: ADTHREE Publishing Co., Ltd.
4-27-37 Higashi Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003 Japan
Printed by: YAMASHIRO Printing Co., Ltd.
588 Houkyouin Higashi-machi, Kamigyo-ku, Kyoto 602-0062 Japan© All rights reserved.
No part of this book may be reproduced, restored in retrieval system, ortransmitted in any form without the written permission from the Publisher
This is published as a report of ITC2014.
Affliations, positions, status and name of persons and organizations appearing in theproceedings are as of 2014.Sept..

Preface
Cultural heritage is confronted with various kinds of disaster risks, due to natural hazards suchas floods, fires, earthquakes etc. as well as human induced events such as terrorism, vandalism,
armed conflict and arson. As a result, many cultural heritage sites including those on the World
Heritage List have been significantly damaged in the recent years. Examples include historic castleof Ferrara in Northern Italy and largest adobe citadel of Bam in the Islamic Republic of Iran due
to the earthquakes in 2011 and 2003 respectively, the Old Town of Edinburgh (United Kingdom)
due to fire in 2002, ancient city of Ayuthhaya in Thailand due to 2011 floods, Bamiyan Buddhas in
Afghanistan and Aleppo Citadel in Syria due to armed conflict in 2001 and 2013 respectively.
Recent research on geological risks conducted by the World Heritage Centre research, basedon open-access risk data, has revealed that 76 per cent of all World Heritage properties would
potentially be exposed to at least one of five main geological natural hazards (earthquake, tsunami,
landslide, volcanic eruption or severe erosion).
Despite the increasing vulnerability of cultural heritage to hazards, disaster risk reduction
unfortunately does not register as a priority area for management. This is supported by the fact that
only handful of World Heritage Properties have formulated disaster risk management plans andeven fewer and implemented them. Among other factors, this is result of low levels of awarenessamong various stakeholders and the public and the limited capacity building of those in charge ofprotection and management.
Therefore it is important to conduct site-based risk assessments and, where appropriate, develop
the necessary disaster risk management plans outlining mitigation, emergency preparedness,
response and recovery measures for various hazards to which the properties are exposed. On theother hand, measures must be taken to advance heritage concerns in the wider agenda for disasterrisk reduction and to raise awareness among heritage managers and professionals.
This necessitates building the capacity of heritage managers, civic defence/emergency response
agencies as well as decision makers from heritage as well as disaster management fields on reducing
disaster risks to cultural heritage. In this direction, a pioneering initiative has been undertaken by the
UNESCO Chair established within the Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage at
Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto (Japan), which in cooperation with ICCROM, ICOMOS-ICORP and the
UNESCO World Heritage Centre has been organizing international training course on disaster risk
management of cultural heritage every year since 2006. The target groups for this course include
government institutions, departments, universities, NGOs and private consultants from cultural
heritage, as well as relevant disaster management fields. The importance of this training course has
been globally recognized as seen with increasing number of applicants from all over the world andour institute hopes to continue this initiative in the future.

Rohit JIGYASU
Professor, Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto
Coordinator of the ITC2014 as a UNESCO Chair Holder

Preface
The Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH)
was established as a permanent research institution in 2013 and has handed over activities fromformer organization started from 2003.
The UNESCO Chair International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural
Heritage started from 2006 as one of our important educational activities, and fortunately we cancontinue it up to 9th year supported by UNESCO, ICCROM and many national and internationalorganizations. I would like to thank these colleagues for supporting us and participants from allover the world. The purposes of this training course are education of experts in each field of cultural
heritage conservation and disaster risk management, and development of base plan for disasterrisk management to secure the safety of people and cultural value in each cultural heritage site andhistorical city. I hope these plans to be actual projects in each country and contribute to culturaladvancement in the world.
Thank you all again and please keep in touch with us for inheriting cultural heritages for next
generation.

Takeyuki OKUBO
Director, R-DMUCH
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Ritsumeikan University

Preface
The International Training Course is the first attempt at the international level to provide high level
education opportunities on the topic natural disasters for people in the cultural heritage field and on
the topic of cultural heritage for people in the natural disaster field. In the 9 years that the course has
been implemented, we had 556 applicants from 51 countries and 84 people from 14 countries havebeen trained. The accepted number of trainee is only 12.1% and it is small percentage. Particularly
in 2012, we could receive 9 people as trainee among 175 applicants and this is only 5%.
We, therefore, have been proposed to increase the number of trainee from past applicants andpeople of relevant fields, both of domestic and international communities. The course, however, isfinancially supported by COE program and the budget of the training course is not large enough toaccept all the applicants because the course is one of the projects of COE program.
Recognizing our activities and achievements for ITC, the Toyota Foundation has decided to support
the course. Then the total budget has been almost doubled and the number of trainee of 2014 wasincreased to 14 from 7-10 of previous years. Moreover we could increase speakers not only fromdomestic but also abroad. On the other hand, we have been proposed to establish a follow-up
program from the graduates of our course and people of relevant fields, which is to establish a similarcourse to our training course in their counties and communities. Owing to the increase of budget
by the Initiative Program of the Toyota Foundation, the follow-up program has been implemented in
October 2014 in Republic of the Union of Myanmar where our resource persons were dispatched.
In this way, because of the support by the Toyota Foundation, the future of our training course ispromising in number and quality, both of trainee and human resources. Hereby we appreciate therecognition and evaluation of activities of our training course by the Toyota Foundation and we would
like to express our heart-full gratitude to the foundation.

Kenzo TOKI
Representative, Toyota Foundation “Initiative Program”, Enhancement of the UNESCO Chair
International Training Course on Cultural Heritage and Risk Management and Post-training Follow-up
Professor, Ritsumeikan University

Table of Contents
Preface3

1

9Introduction
1.1 Background and Objective of
the 9th International Training Course 201410

1.2Timetable of UNESCO Chair Programme on Cultural Heritage andRisk Management, International Training Course (ITC) on Disaster Risk
Management of Cultural Heritage 2014, 9th year, Ritsumeikan University
2

22

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities25

2.1HistoricCentreofGjirokastra,Albania

26

2.2DisasterRiskManagementPlanningforCulturalHeritageSitesinAustralia:CaseStudy-TheRocks,Sydney,Australia

322.3DisasterRiskManagementfortheHistoricfor
SanAntoniodelCerrodeOrodeZaruma

44

2.4FormulatingDisasterRiskManagementPlanofapartofHistoricCairo

50

2.5OutlineofaDisasterRiskManagementPlan(DRM)
ofHistoricCentre.Tegucigalpa,Honduras
3

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

62
71

3.1CulturalHeritageatRisk:PreparingaDisasterRiskManagementPlanfortheUNESCOWorldHeritagePropertyofFatehpurSikri,India
3.2DisasterRiskManagementofAl-Hadba’aMinaret’ssite72
80

3.3 Lahore Fort

86

3.4 The Disaster Risk Management Plan for the
Krak des Chevaliers (Alhosn Castle) in
Syria - It had an impact both in the East and in the West
4

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

94
101

4.1 Disaster Risk Management Plan for Castle Batthyanyin Ludbreg, Croatia
4.2 Risk Management of Gedung Sate as a Cultural Heritage

102
110

4.3 Government Buildings Historic Reserve - Wellington,
New Zealand118

4.4 Disaster Risk Management for Vimanmek
Palace and Museum
Appendix

128
139

List of Resource Persons

140

List of Participants

142

Photos of ITC 2014143

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and Objectives of
The 9th International Training Course 2014

Disasters and Cultural Heritage
Recent disasters such as fires in Lijiang, China in 2013 and earlier this year, destructive earthquake
and cyclones in Philippines last year, the devastating tsunami in North East of Japan in 2011 andas well as earthquakes that hit Christchurch, Newzealand (2010 and 2011), Haiti and Chile (in2010) have caused enormous loss of life, property and cultural heritage. This disaster has once
again shown that cultural heritage is highly vulnerable to natural disasters such as earthquake, theTsunami, fire, floods and cyclones.
Therefore it is important to undertake proactive measures that can reduce risks to cultural heritage
from these catastrophic events through adequate mitigation and preparedness. In the post disaster
phase, the challenge is how to salvage heritage properties, which are at risk of demolition and toassess their damage. The long term challenge during recovery phase is how to repair and retrofit
them and undertake reconstruction that respects tangible as well as intangible heritage values.
In the light of these challenges, comprehensive risk management is essential for the protectionof cultural heritage from disasters. Therefore Cultural Heritage and Risk Management project ofInstitute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH) aims
to organize the UNESCO Chair International Training Programme to build the institutional capacity
needed to formulate comprehensive risk management plans that are based on the characteristics ofcultural heritage and nature of hazards in the regional context.
One of the main reasons for extensive damage to cultural heritage is due to fires resulting fromnatural or human induced causes. Also fires can result from earthquakes as was the case during
1995 Great Hanshin Awaji earthquake in Japan. Considering these issues, the 9th UNESCO Chair
International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage will specificallyfocus on ‘Protecting living cultural heritage from disaster risks due to fire’.

101.1 Background and Objectives of The 9th International Training Course 2014

Regional Distribution of World Heritage sites located on the Earthquake Zones

RegionCultural/Mix

0-100
km

100-200
km

100

Australia/New ZealandWithin
200km

Over
200km

Total

91

191

27%

513

73%

704

1

1

14%

6

86%

7

45%

6

55%

11

Caribbean

2

3

5

Central America

10

10

20

59%

14

41%

34

Central Asia

2

2

22%

7

78%

9

Eastern Africa

2

1

3

14%

18

86%

21

Eastern Asia

10

11

21

42%

29

58%

50

Eastern Europe

1

1

2%

56

98%

57

0

0%

14

100%

14

1

2

100%

0%

2

1

1

100%

0%

1

European Russia
Melanesia

1

Middle Africa
Northern Africa

3

7

21%

27

79%

34

Northern America

1

4

1

7%

13

93%

14

Northern Europe

1

1

2%

49

98%

50

8

16

24

57%

18

43%

42

6

1

7

39%

11

61%

18

0

0%

7

100%

7

Southern Asia

6

8

14

29%

34

71%

48

Southern Europe

35

23

58

45%

70

55%

128

0

0%

16

100%

16

8

21

40%

31

60%

52

2

2

2%

87

98%

89

Southern Africa

Western Africa
Western Asia

13

Western Europe
Natural

36

18

54

31%

120

69%

174

Total

136

109

245

28%

633

72%

878

Introduction

South America
Southeastern Asia

Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage,
Ritsumeikan University and Its Training Course
UNESCO Chair Programme on the International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management ofCultural Heritage is a follow-up of the recommendations adopted at the Special Thematic Session on
Risk Management for Cultural Heritage held at UN-WCDR (World Conference on Disaster Reduction)
in January 2005 in Kobe, Hyogo, Japan. One of these recommendations advocated the need for theacademic community to develop scientific research, education and training programs incorporating
cultural heritage in both its tangible and intangible manifestations, into risk management and disasterrecovery. The importance of strengthening knowledge, innovation and education to build a cultureof disaster prevention at WH properties was reiterated also by the World Heritage Committee at its
30th session (Vilnius, Lithuania, July 2006).
Furthermore, the “Declaration”, adopted at the International Disaster Reduction Conference (IDRC)
of Davos (August 2006) confirmed that “concern for heritage, both tangible and intangible, should
be incorporated into disaster risk reduction strategies and plans, which are strengthened throughattention to cultural attributes and traditional knowledge.”
In response to these recommendations by the international community, the Institute of Disaster
Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage at Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH) has been acting as11

a focal point for organizing international research, training and information network in the field of
cultural heritage risk management and disaster mitigation. Besides R-DMUCH has also functioned
as the international secretariat for ICOMOS-International Scientific Committee on Risk Preparedness(ICORP) and many of its faculty are expert members of the Scientific Committee.
The past training courses has been participated by 84 participants in total from 39 countries;
Indonesia, South Korea, China, Philippines, Malaysia, Myanmar and Thailand from East Asia; India,
Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka and Maldives from South Asia; Palau, Fiji, New
Zealand and Australia from Oceania; Peru, Jamaica, Colombia, Mexico, Ecuador and Honduras
from Central and South America; Serbia, Moldova, Italy, Albania and Croatia from Europe; Iran,
Turkey, Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq from Middle East; Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria, Tanzania and Egypt
from Africa.
Objectives and Methodology of the Training Course
The main objective of the course was to provide an overview of the various aspects of disaster risk
management of cultural heritage. In particular, the course provides interdisciplinary training to:✓ Undertake an integrated risk assessment by analyzing the vulnerability of cultural heritage todisasters caused by natural and human induced hazards;✓ Build an integrated system for disaster risk management of cultural heritage, incorporating
prevention/mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery measures;✓ Formulate disaster risk management plans for cultural heritage that correspond to the urban andregional disaster management plans and policies; and✓ Establish an international scientific support network for risk management of cultural heritage inorder to build the institutional capacity needed to formulate comprehensive risk management
plans that are based on the characteristics of cultural heritage and nature of hazards in theregional context.
The course comprised lectures, site visits, workshops, discussions, team projects and individual/group presentations. Participants were expected to actively participate throughout the course. The
course aimd at promoting the development of collaborations and network building among scholars
and professionals in cultural heritage protection. This course was provided scientific support by theWorld Heritage Centre (UNESCO) and the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and
Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM)..

12

1.1 Background and Objectives of The 9th International Training Course 2014

Based on the information obtained from lectures and site visits, and exercises through workshops,
the training course also set the goal of raising planning skills in cultural heritage disaster prevention,by having each participant make a plan during a team project for the prevention of disaster to his/her country’s cultural heritage, in line with each country’s respective social and economic situation.
In order to do so, the Institute asked the participants to prepare the relevant materials before coming
to Japan, so that the two participants from each country could learn from each other’s experiencethrough this process.
Special Theme of 2014 International Training Programme:
One of the main reasons for extensive damage to cultural heritage is due to fires resulting fromnatural (bush/forest fires) or human induced causes (arson, chemical or bomb explosion, poor
electric wiring or during renovation works). Also fires can result from earthquakes as was the caseduring 1995 Great Hanshin Awaji earthquake in Japan. Considering these issues, the 9th UNESCO
Chair International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage focused on‘Protecting living cultural heritage from disaster risks due to fire’. Policies and planning measures
for reducing fire risks to cultural heritage especially in rapidly urbanizing context of developing
countries, special techniques for fire prevention and mitigation, emergency response as well asinterventions for long term restoration and rehabilitation of cultural heritage following disaster werediscussed during the course.

Introduction

Previous International Training Courses (2006-2013)
ITC 2006
In 2006, which was the first year for this course, eight participants from four countries were invited;
namely India and Pakistan, which were struck by a great earthquake in 2005 in Kashmir; Indonesia,
which suffered the Indian Ocean Tsunami triggered by the Sumatra Earthquake in 2004 and theEarthquake on the Javanese Island in 2004; and Korea, which had suffered a big forest fire.
ITC 2007
In 2007, R-DMUCH exchanged MOU with ICCROM and established a criterion for choosing
participants with the support of ICCROM. As a result, eight trainees from Bangladesh, China, Peru
and Philippines were invited for the training course.
Based on the experience of 2006 training course, it was decided to make closer relation between
the lectures, site visits and workshops. Therefore in 2007, several related sets of lectures were heldin the mornings and workshops in the afternoons. Based on these, discussions were facilitated by
the instructors so that the trainees were able to reflect more effectively on the challenges for cultural
heritage disaster management within their own context.
ITC 2008
The 2008 training course actively built upon the rich experience gathered during the courses heldin the previous two years. This year had participants from five countries from Asia and Europe,
namely Nepal, Bhutan, Iran, Serbia and Chinese Taipei. Effort was made to make this year’s course,
more field-based by drawing upon the unique opportunity offered by the location of important World
Heritage Sites in Kyoto such as Kiyomizu-dera and Ninna-ji temples. Most of the workshops were,
therefore, based on field work undertaken by the participants in these sites. This year’s course also
put greater emphasis on exposing the participants to the methodology for undertaking disaster risk
assessment for cultural heritage sites.
ITC 2009
The 2009 training course further evolved on the basis of rich feedback provided by the participantsof the training courses from previous years. In response to the need for making the course more
relevant to specific requirements and constraints of the developing countries, it was decided to13organize the course partly in Japan and partly in Nepal.
Moreover, for the first time, the training course had a specific theme, namely “Earthquake risk
management of Historic Urban Areas.” For this purpose, Kyoto and Kathmandu; two historic cities
with rich cultural heritage but extremely vulnerable to earthquakes, were chosen as the case study
sites for undertaking field exercises during the training course.
The first week of the course was organized in Japan and it focused on familiarizing the participants
with the basic methodology for risk assessment and management for cultural heritage properties.
The participants were shown various disaster prevention facilities developed for numerous cultural
heritage sites in Kyoto. Second week in Kathmandu focused on the earthquake vulnerability andcapacity of the World Heritage Monument Zone of Patan and its surrounding historic urban area,
both at building and area levels.
The UNESCO Chair programme intends to build upon the four years of very rich experience gained
through very active participation of lecturers from Japan and abroad, as well as the international
participants from various countries from Asia, Europe and the Caribbean and further enrich thecontents of the training course in subsequent years.
ITC 2010
Fifth UNESCO Chair International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage2010 was held from 13 to 26 September 2010 in Kyoto, Kobe and Sasayama, Japan. In the lightof destructive Haiti earthquake on January 2010, this fifth International Training Course especially
focused on emergency response and long term recovery of wooden and masonry composite
Cultural Heritage from disasters. It was attended by 11 participants from 5 countries; Bhutan, Palau,
Peru, Serbia and Turkey.
On the final day of the course, the international symposium titled “How to protect Cultural Heritage from
Disaster; Risk Preparedness and Post Disaster Recovery” was organized by Ritsumeikan University
and the ICOMOS International Committee on Risk Preparedness (ICORP). In the symposium, thecurrent challenges for protection of cultural heritages taking into account the context of post disasterrecovery was discussed in great depth with international experts from UNESCO, ICOMOS, ICORP
and a representative of Kyo-o-Gokokuji Temple; World Cultural Heritage site in Kyoto.
ITC 2011
Sixth UNESCO Chair International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage
was held from 10 to 24 September 2011 in Kyoto, Kobe and Tohoku area of East Japan. In thelight of increasing vulnerability of rapidly urbanizing settlements, the course focused on “Integrated
Approach for Disaster Risk Mitigation of Historic Cities”. The course was attended by 11 participantsfrom 8 countries; Columbia, Jamaica, Kenya, Uganda, China, Mexico, India and Bangladesh.
ITC 2012
Seventh International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage held during
September 2012 in Kyoto, Kobe and Tohoku area of East Japan focused on sustainable recovery ofcultural heritage. Accordingly the theme of the course was “From Recovery to Risk Reduction for
Sustainability of Historic Areas”.
ITC 2013
The theme of the 8th UNESCO Chair International Training Course on Disaster Risk Managementof Cultural Heritage was “Reducing Disaster Risks to Historic Urban Areas and Their Territorial
Settings through Mitigation”. The course focused on policies and planning measures for mitigating
risks to cultural heritage from multiple hazards such as earthquakes, floods, landslides and fires,
especially in rapidly urbanizing context of developing countries. Special techniques for mitigating
risks from earthquakes and fires were also highlighted besides policies, planning and design14

1.1 Background and Objectives of The 9th International Training Course 2014

interventions for long term restoration and rehabilitation of cultural heritage following disaster througha special workshop in the area affected by the Great East Japan Disaster in 2011.
Organizers and Participants
The training course has been organized from the beginning in cooperation with the UNESCO World
Heritage Centre, ICCROM, ICOMOS and relevant institutions of the government of Japan. In 2014, theToyota Foundation “Initiative Program” has proposed to support our training course by providing thebudget. Participants will include managers of cultural heritage, disaster risk management experts,
decision makers and government officials involved in cultural properties or disaster management.
Participants List of the Previous Training Courses
ITC 2006, the 1st year
No

1

Name

Country

Poonacha KODIRA INDIAWork Position and Affiliation
Director (Conservation),
Ministry of Tourism andCulture Archaeological
Survey of India

2

Anup KARANTH

INDIA

3

Sektiadi

Lecturer,
Dept. of Archaeology, Faculty
INDONSESIA of Culture Sciences, Gadjah

Earthquake Hazard andVulnerability aspects for the
WH Site of Qutub Complex,
New Delhi and Proposed
Management System
Introduction

Project Coordinator,
Urban Earthquake
Vulnerability Reduction
Project, United Nations
Development Programme(UNDP) India

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

Mitigation and Emergency
Preparedness Plan for
the Protection of WH Site
Supervisor of Rescueof Prambanan and its
on Preservation Division,
Dept. of Cultural and Tourism, Surrounding Environment
from Earthquake
Center for Preservationof Cultural Heritage of
Yogyakarta Province

Mada University

4

5

6

Manggar AYUATI

Fauzia QURESHI

Hussain KHADIMINDONESIAPAKISTAN

Head of the Departmentof Architecture,
National College of Arts,
LahorePAKISTAN

Coordinator,
Disaster Management Desk
RDPI,
Rural Development Policy
Institute

7

Seok JEONG

KOREA

8

Woongju SHIN

KOREALong Term Maintenance Planfor Mitigation against Floods
for WH Site of Rohtas Fort

Government employeeof Modern Construction Field,
Tangible Cultural Heritage
Bureau,Emergency Preparedness
Cultural Heritage
Measures for the Protection
Administration,of Folk Village of Hahoe in
Republic of Korea
Andong City from Fire
Concurrent Professor,
Dept. Interior Architecture,
Chosun College of Scienceand Technology

15

ITC 2007, the 2nd year
No

Name

CountryWork Position and Affiliation

1

A.K.M. Monowar
Hossain AKHAND

BANGLADESH

Deputy Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
GOVT. of Bangladesh

2

Md. Rafiqul ALAMBANGLADESH

Executive Director,
DWIP UNNAYAN SONGTHA(DUS)

P. R. CHINA

Officer of Protection &Construction Office,Protection and Management
Bureau of World Cultural
Heritage Site - the Old Townof Lijiang

3

Shijun HE

P. R. CHINA

Cuiyu HE

5Maria Del Carmen
PERU
CORRALES PEREZ

Instituto Nacional De Cultura
Architect of the conservation
and Restoration Sub Direction

6

Partricia Isabel
GIBU YAGUE

PERU

Chief of Laboratory ofStructures,Japan-Peru Center for
Earthquake Engineering
Research and Disaster
Mitigation

7

Glen
CONCEPCIONCity Disaster Action Officer
and City Environment &PHILIPPINES Natural Resources Officer,
City Government of Vigan

8

Eric QUADRA

PHILIPPINES Architect, LGU-Vigan City

ITC 2008, the 3rd year

1

Choening DORJI

CountryWork Position and Affiliation

BHUTAN

Architect,
Division for Conservation of
Heritage Sites, Department
of Culture, Ministry of Home
& Cultural Affairs Royal
Government of Bhutan

2

Karma TENZIN

BHUTAN

Civil Engineer,
Tashichhodzong Maintenance
Division, Dzongkhag
Administration

3

Mahmoud NEJATI

IRAN

Deputy of Research &Technical Consultant,
Recovery Project of Bam’s
Cultural Heritage

4

16

Name

Fatemeh
MEHDIZADEHSARADJ

IRAN

Disaster Risk Management
Plan for Lal Bagh Fort, Dhaka,Bangladesh

Disaster Risk Management
Plan for Case Study Heritage
Staff of Engineering & Project Site on the Old Town of
Lijiang
Dept.,
Protection and Management
Bureau of World Cultural
Heritage Site - the Old Townof Lijiang

4

No

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

Disaster Risk Management
Plan of Lima Historical Center

Vigan Disaster Risk
Management Plan for Cultural
Heritage

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

Disaster Risk Management
Plan for Tashichhodzong

Disaster Risk Management
for Bam’s Cultural Heritage
Assistant Professor,
Department of Conservation,
Iran University of Science andTechnology

1.1 Background and Objectives of The 9th International Training Course 2014

5

Kai Ube Prasad
WEISE

NEPAL

Architect,
Planners’ Alliance for the
Himalayan & Allied Regions

6

Suman Narsingh
RAJBHANDARI

NEPALAssistant Professor,
Nepal Engineering College

7

Ivana FILIPOVICSERBIA

Architect Conservationist,
Disaster Risk Management
Cultural Heritage Preservation Plan for Lower Town in
Institute of Belgrade
Belgrade Fortress8

Shang Chia CHIOU TAIWAN

9

Shen Wen CHIENTAIWAN

Professor,
Department of Architecture
and Interior Design, National Disaster Risk Management
Yunlin University of Science & Plan for Fort San Domingo
Technology
in Tamsui and Surround
Historical Buildings
Associate Professor,
Department of Fire Science,Central Police University

ITC 2009, the 4th year
No

1

Name

Rong YU

Yuan DING

3

Ramesh
THAPALIYA

4

5

Suresh Suras
SHRESTHAPauline BROWNCountryWork Position and Affiliation

P. R. CHINA

Lecturer,
Wenhua College, Huazhong
University of Science andTechnology

P.R.CHINA

Researcher,
Tongji University, National
Historic Cities ResearchCenterNEPAL

Architect,World Heritage Conservation
Section/Ministry of Culture
and State Restructuring,
Department of Archaeology

NEPAL

Archaeological Officer,
Ministry of Culture and state
Restructuring, Department ofArchaeology

JAMAICA

Senior Director,
Office of Disaster
Preparedness andEmergency Management
Senior Archaeologist,
Jamaica National Heritage
Trust

6

Audene BROOKSJAMAICA

7

Sergius CIOCANU

MOLDOVA

8

Valeria
SURUCEANU

MOLDOVADRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

Dujiangyan,
the World Heritage Site
Introduction

2

Disaster Risk Management
Plan for Kathmandu Valley
WH Site Patan Durbar Square
Monument Zone

Patan Durbar Protected
Monument Zone

Port Royal City

Head Scientific Researcher,
Institute of Cultural Heritageof the Academy of Science of
National Museum of Fine Arts
Moldova(Buildings and Collection)
Curator,National art Museum ofMoldova17

Observers in the Kathmandu Part of the ITC 2009No
Name
CountryWork Position and Affiliation1

Keshab P.
SHRESTHA

NEPAL

Chief,
National History Museum

2

Punya Sagar
MARAHATTA

NEPAL

Lecturer,
IoE, tribhuvan University

3

Ajay LAL
CHANDRANEPAL

Assistant Professor,
Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, IoE

4

Gyanin RAI

NEPAL

Chief (Administration, Information &Public Relation Section),
Lumbini Development Trust

5

Inu PRADHANSALIKE

NEPAL

Lecturer,
Khwopa Engineering College

6

Saubhagya
PRADHNANGANEPALHead of Culture and Archaeology Unit,
Lalitpur Sub Metropolitan City Office7

Chandra Shova
SHAKYANEPAL

Head of Heritage Section,
Lalitpur Sub Metropolitan City Office8

Prabin SHRESTHA NEPAL

Head of Urban Development Division,
Lalitpur Sub Metropolitan City Office

9

Ashok SHRESTHANEPALHead of Administration Division,
Lalitpur Sub Metropolitan City Office

10 Sainik Raj SINGHNEPALHead of Earthquake Safety Section,
Lalitpur Sub Metropolitan City OfficeCountryWork Position and Affiliation

BHUTAN

Structural Engineer,
Division for Conservation of
Heritage Sites, Department
of Culture, Ministry of Home
& Cultural Affairs, Royal
Government of Bhutan

BHUTAN

Deputy Chief Conservation
Architect,
Division for Conservation of
Heritage Sites, Department
of Culture, Ministry of Homeand Cultural Affairs, Royal
Government of Bhutan

PALAU

Director, Historical
Preservation Officer,
Bureau of Arts & Culture,
Ministry of Community &Cultural Affairs

ITC 2010, the 5th year
No

1

DechenTSHERING

2

Junko MUKAI

3

Alexander G
DWIGHT

4

18

Name

Sunny NGIRMANG PALAU

Palau National Registrar,
Bureau of Arts & Culture,
Palau Historic Preservation
Office

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

Wangduephodrang Dzong

Airai Bai, Ngkeklau Bai,
Melkeok and Koror Bai

1.1 Background and Objectives of The 9th International Training Course 2014

5

TeresaVILCAPOMAHUAPAYAPERU

University Professor,
Sagrado Corazon University

6

Olga Keiko
MENDOZASHIMADAPERU

Doctor Course Student,
JSPS Research Fellow,
Graduate School of Science& Engineering, Ritsumeikan
University

7

Marilene
TERRONES DIAZ

PERU

University Professor,
Sagrado Corazon University

8

MilicaGROZDANICSERBIA

9

Svetlana
Dimitrijevic
MARKOVICSERBIA

Zeynep10
GUL UNAL

11

MeltemVATAN KAPTAN

Director,
Cultural Heritage Preservation Belgrade’s samples ofOriental-Balkan architecture
Institute of Belgrade(Princess Ljubica Residence,
Architect - Conservator Prince Milos Residence,
Senior Associate,
Tavern "?", Dositej’s Lyceum
Cultural Heritage Preservation etc.)
Institute of Belgrade

TURKEY

Assistant Professor, Dr.
Yildiz Technical University,
Faculty of Architecture,
Restoration Department

TURKEY

Research Assistant, PhD
Student,
Yildiz Technical University,
Faculty of Architecture,
Structural Systems Division

CountryWork Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

Name

Kütahya District

1

Celina RINCON

COLOMBIA

Assessor for the Heritage
Director Office,Ministry of Culture

History center of Santa Cruzde Mompox

2

Cheryl NICHOLSJAMAICA

Training Manager,
Office of Disaster
Preparedness andEmergency Management

The Holy Trinity Cathedral

3

Jose Ramon
PEREZ OCEJOMEXICO

Part-time Teacher,
Universidad de las Américas(Puebla, MEXICO)Colonial City Centre of Puebla

4

Julius
MWAHUNGA

KENYA

Senior Cultural Officer,
Ministry of State for National
Heritage and Culture,
Department of Culture

Lamu Old Town

5

Remigius
KIGONGOUGANDA

Conservator Sites andMonuments/ Site Manager,
Kasubi Tombs
Department of Museums andMonuments

6

Janhwij SHARMA

INDIA

Director (Conservation andWorld Heritage),
Archaeological Survey ofIndia, Ministry of Culture

Introduction

ITC 2011, the 6th year
No

Historical Centre of the City ofArequipa

Taj Mahal

19

7

Md. Aamir Hussain BANGLASHIKDER
DESH

Urban Local Body
Coordinator,
Bangladesh Municipal
Development Fund (BMDF)

Mosque city of Bagerhat

8Qing WEI

P. R. CHINA

Deputy Director,
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Center, THAD

Kulangsu

P. R. CHINAPhD Candidate,
Urban Design and Planning
Department, Norwegian
University of Science andTechnology (NTNU)

Taoping Qiang Village

CountryWork Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

FIJI

Secretary General,
ICOMOS PASIFIKA

Levuka Town

INDIA

Sector Manager,
Gujarat State Disaster
Management Authority

Champaner - Pavagadh
Archaeological Park,
Panchamahal District,
Gujarat, WHS

Jongmyo Shrine, WHS

9

Yu WANGITC 2012, the 7th year
No

Name

1

Suzie YEE SHOW

2

Vikas LAKHANI

3

Sang sun JO

KOREA

Research Associate andCurator,Heritage Repair Division,
Cultural Heritage
Administration of KOREA

4

Rosli
BIN HAJI NOR

MALAYSIA

Head of Melaka World
Heritage Office,Historic City of Melaka, WHS
Melaka World Heritage Office
Bagan located in Manadalay
Division, Myanmar

5

Ni LEI WIN

MYANMAR

Communications Officer at
World Concern Myanmar,
Relief, Recovery andDevelopment Project inMyanma6

Helen
McCRACKENNEWZEALAND

Policy Adviser - Heritage,
Ministry for Culture andHeritage

Cuba Street Historic Area,
Wellington

7

Usman SHAMIMPAKISTAN

Programme Officer,
Kuchlak Welfare Society(KWS)

Mehrgarh, lies on the "Kachi
plain" of now Balochistan,
Pakistan

8

PoornaYAHAMPATHSRI LANKA

Consultant- External Resource Person,
Disaster Risk Management &Climate Change for GIZ

Sacred City of Kandy,
Sri Lanka, WHS

9

Sibel
YILDIRIM ESEN

TURKEYConservation Architect,
Ministry of Culture andTourism

Observers
No
Name

20

Country

Agora Archeological Sitein the Historic City of Izmir

Work Position and Affiliation

1

Dong Seok KANG

KOREA

A Section Chief of GIS, Cultural Heritage Administration

2

Thi My Thi TONGVIET NAM

PhD Student, International Environmental and Disaster
Management Laboratory, Graduate School of Global
Environmental Studies, Kyoto University

1.1 Background and Objectives of The 9th International Training Course 2014

ITC 2013, the 8th year
No

Name

1

Saleh Mohammad
SAMIT

2

Dian LAKSHMIPRATIWIWork Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipantsNational Manager,
Community Development
Programme
Aga Khan FoundationAfghanistan

Important sites in Bamyan
Province, including
Provincial capitalof Bamyan

INDONESIAHead of Archaeological
Section,Division of History,
Archaeological and Museum,
Cultural Service Office,
Government of Yogyakarta
Special Territory

Yogyakarta Historic City
(Case Study: Cultural
Heritage Area of Kraton,
Kotagede and Imogiri)

IRAN

Director,
Risk Management ResearchCenter(Associate Professor)
Risk Management ResearchCenter,International Institute ofEarthquake Engineering andSeismology

Tehran Bazaar, Golestan
Palace and their surrounding
old urban fabrics/ Tehran,IranCountryAFGHA
NISTAN

4

Barbara CARANZA ITALY

MEC srl
Staglieno Monumental
Italian Army “LIGURIA” ARMY
Cemetery of Genoa
MILITARY COMMAND

5

Paola MUSSINIITALY

Researcher,
SiTI-Instituto Superioresui Sistemi Territoriali perl’Innovazione

Portovenere, Cinque Terre,
and the lslands (Palmaria,Tino
and Tinetto)

6

Zaha AHMED

MALDIVES

Assistant Architect,
Heritage Department,
Male' Republic of Maldives

Laamu atoll Isdhoo Old Friday
mosque in Maldives

NEPAL

Advisor,
Urban Planning andInfrastructure Development,
GFA Consulting Group (Nepal
Office), on behalf of GIZ/
The city core area of Tansen
Nepal
Municipality
Municipal Support
Team, Ministry of Urban
Development, Department
of Urban Development andBuilding Construction

7

Arjun KOIRALA

8

Kenechukwu Chudi
NIGERIAONUKWUBE

Director of Programs,
Development Education and
Sukur Cultural Landscape
Advocacy
Nigeria
Resources Initiative for Africa(DEAR Africa)

9

Muhammad Juma
MUHAMMADTANZANIA

Director,
Urban and Rural Planning
Department of Urban and
Rural Planning

Zanzibar Stone Town

THAILAND

Landscape Architect
Ministry of Culture, Fine Arts
Department,
Office of Architecture

Historic City of Ayutthaya

Hatthaya SIRIPHA
10
TTHANAKUN

Introduction

3

Kambod AMINIHOSSEINI

21

1.2 Timetable of UNESCO Chair Programme on Cultural Heritage and Risk Ma
Management of Cultural Heritage 2014, 9th year, Ritsumeikan University
9/5 9/5
Fri Fri

9/6 9/6
Sat SatIntroduction
Introduction
ArrivalArrival and The
and First
The First
Presentation
Presentation

THEME
THEME
Venue
Venue

DMUCH
DMUCH

9/7 9/7
Sun Sun

9/8 9/8
9/9 9/9
9/109/10
9/119/11
9/129/12
MonMonTue Tue
WedWedThu Thu
Fri FriPrinciples,
Principles,
Emergency
Emergency
CoreCore
Principle
and and Risk Risk
Assessment
Scenarios
Prevention
Principle Framework
Framework
AssessmentDisaster
Disaster
ScenariosRisk Risk
Prevention
Preparedness
Preparedness
Analysisat Siteand Value
LevelLevel for Prioritization
Analysisat Siteat Urban
for Prioritization and Mitigationand Mitigation
and Value Risk Risk
at Urbanand and
Response
Response
LevelLevel
DMUCH
Kiyomizu-Dera
DMUCH
DMUCH
Ninna-Ji
DMUCH
Kiyomizu-Dera Sannei-Zaka
Sannei-Zaka
DMUCH
DMUCH
Ninna-Ji

9/139/13
Sat Sat

The Middle
The Middle
R
Presentation
Presentation
DMUCH
DMUCH

9:00 9:00

Lecture3 3
LectureRecapRecap
RecapRecap
RecapRecap
Recap
Recap
Disaster
Risk Risk
DisasterManagementof ofManagement
Cultural
Heritage
Cultural
Heritage
Opening
Address
Opening
AddressSigniﬁcanceLecture7-1 7-1
Lectureand Core
Signiﬁcanceand Core Lecture
5 5LectureLecture11 11
LectureImagination
Disaster
Imagination
Principles
Principles
Introduction
to theto theDisaster
Lecture8 8Introduction
LectureIntroduction
to theto theIntroduction
GameGame(DIG) (DIG)(T.OKUBO)(T.OKUBO)(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU) Context
of Japanese
Ecologyand andContextof Japanese
Ecology
Integrated
Integrated
Orientation
Orientation
WoodenCulturalof of
WoodenCultural to SanneiSustainability
Zaka Zaka Sustainability
to SanneiMethodology
for for
Methodology
to thetoCourse
the Course
Heritage
Historic
Urban
AreasAreas
Heritage
Historic
Urban
Assessing
RisksRisks
Assessing(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU)(N.TSURUOKA,(S.MOFFATT)(N.TSURUOKA,(S.MOFFATT)(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU)
KyotoKyoto
Pref.)Pref.)

Recap
Recap

Registration
Registration

10:0010:00

11:0011:00

13:0 130:0

to Ninna-Ji
to Ninna-Ji

Self Study
Self StudyG

Lecture4 4LectureAssessingthe Values
Assessingthe Values
Site Visit
3 3
Site Visitof Cultural
Heritageof Cultural
Heritage
World
Heritage
Site Site
World
Heritage(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU)
Lecture6 6
Lecture1 1
LectureLectureLecture9 9Site Visit
2 2
Site Visit
LectureFire
Prevention
Fire
Prevention
Dynamic
Lecture
12 12
The Needfor Disaster
Analysisof ofDynamic
LectureAnalysis
The Needfor Disaster
Mitigation
and Field
WorkWork Disasterand Field
Disaster
Mitigation
at Ninna-Ji
Facilities
at Ninna-Ji
LANDSLIDE,
Risk Management
for forEarthquakes
and and
LANDSLIDE, Facilities
Earthquakes
Risk Management
and Integrated
Sannei-Zaka
Sannei-Zaka
and Integrated
TempleTemplePrevention
and and
Cultural
Heritage
in inSeismic
Performance
Prevention
Seismic
Performance
Cultural
Heritageof Historic
Important
Important Planning
Planningof Historic(H.OMORI)(H.OMORI)
Mitigation
Techniques
Historic
Cities:Cities:
The Theof Japanese
Historical
Mitigation
Techniquesof Japanese
Historical
Historic
Cities'Cities'
Preservation
District
Preservation
District(R.FUKAGAWA)
Case Caseof Kyoto
Structures(R.FUKAGAWA)
Structuresof Kyoto(S.MOFFATT)(T.OKUBO)(T.OKUBO)(S.MOFFATT)(K.TOKI)(K.IZUNO)(K.IZUNO)(K.TOKI)
Workshop
1 1
WorkshopAssessingthe Values
Assessingthe Values
H UCH
LunchLunch
LunchLunch
LunchLunch
LunchLunch
to DM
toUDCM(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU)

12:0012:00

H UCH
to DM
toUDCM

LunchLunch

0

D

Re

P
M
H
LunchLunch

LunchLunch

to Kiyomizu-Dera
to Kiyomizu-Dera
Lecture13 13
LectureRisk Assessment
of of
Lecture10 10
Risk Assessment
LectureArchaeologicalEngaging
ArchaeologicalEngaging
at Territorial
Communities
for forHeritage
Heritageat Territorial Lecture
Communities
16 16
LectureScale.Scale.
Disaster
Risk Risk
DisasterDisasterPrevention
DisasterPrevention
The Caseof IzmirReduction
The Caseof Izmirfor Cultural
Reduction
Heritage
for Cultural
Heritage
Metropolitan
Area Area in Kyoto(R.SHAW)
Metropolitan(R.SHAW)City City
in Kyoto(S.ESEN)(S.ESEN)(Y.MACHIDA,(Y.MACHIDA,

LunchLunch
14:0 140:0

15:0015:00

Self-Study
Self-Study0Site Visit
Site 1-1
Visit 1-1
Observationsof Risks
Observationsof Risks
at WHSin Kiyomizuat WHS
in KiyomizuDera Dera
Workshop
3 3Workshop(N.TSURUOKA,(N.TSURUOKA, Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment
KyotoKyoto
Pref. Pref.
)) Exercise: Presentation
Exercise: Presentation
and Discussion
on DIGand Discussion
on DIG(T.OKUBO)(T.OKUBO)The First
The First
Presentations
Presentations
by thebyTraining
the Training
Participants/
Participants/
Cultural
Heritage
and and
Cultural
Heritage
DisasterDisaster

KyotoKyoto
City FD)City FD)

Lecture14 14
LectureFloodFlood
Prevention
and andPrevention
Mitigation
Techniques
Mitigation
Techniques(K.SAWAI)(K.SAWAI)

Site Visit
Site1-2
Visit 1-2
Observationsof Risks
Observationsof at
Risks at
WHS inKiyomizu-Dera
WHS
in Kiyomizu-Dera(FUJIMOTO,ISHIDA)(FUJIMOTO,ISHIDA)

16:0016:00

Workshop
4 4Workshop
Disaster
Risk Risk
Building
Disaster
Lecture7-2 7-2 Building
LectureScenarios
Scenarios
Disaster
Imagination
Disaster
Imagination(S. MOFFATT)(S. MOFFATT)
GameGame(DIG)(DIG)(T.OKUBO)(T.OKUBO)

to DMUCH
to DMUCH
17:0017:00

Lecture2 2LectureIntroduction
to theto theIntroduction
Contextof HistoricContextof Historic
City ofKyoto
Cityof Kyoto(M.YAMASAKI)(M.YAMASAKI)

Workshop
2 2Workshop

Lecture15 15
LectureGIS for
GISDisasterfor Disaster
Managementof ofManagement
Historical
City, City,
KyotoKyoto
Historical(K.YANO)(K.YANO)

Case Case
StudyStudy
Project
Project
WorkWork

Impactof Disasteron on
Impactof Disaster
Cultural
Heritage/
Cultural
Heritage/in CaseKiyomizu-Dera
in of
Case
of Kiyomizu-Dera
Temple,Introduction
to toTemple,Introduction
Key Terminology
Key Terminology(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU)

18:0018:00

Lecture17 17
LectureTechniques
for forTechniques
Preventing
and andPreventing
Mitigating
Fire in
Mitigating
Fire inHistoric
Buildings
Historic
Buildings(C. MARRION)(C. MARRION)

The Middle
The Middle
Presentations
Presentations
by thebyTraining
the Training
ParticipantsParticipants

Workshop
5 5WorkshopCase Case
StudyStudy
Project
StudyStudy
Project
ProjectCase Case
ProjectRole Playing
Workshop
Role Playing
Workshopon Emergency
Responseon Emergency
Response
WorkWork
WorkWork(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU)

19:0019:00
WelcomeDinner
WelcomeDinner

Accommodation
Accommodation
KyotoKyoto

22

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

nagement, International Training Course (ITC) on Disaster Risk
9/149/14
Sun Sun

9/159/15
Mon,Mon,Hoｌiday
Hoｌiday

9/169/16
Tue Tue

9/179/17
WedWedFromFrom
Response
to toPlanning
for for FromFrom
Response
to to
Response
Planning
ResponseGreat
Recovery:Lessons
Great
Recovery:Great
Recovery:LessonsRecovery:
Recovery:Great Recovery:
fromfrom
KobeKobe East EastJapan
Disaster
East EastJapan
DisasterJapan
DisasterJapan
Disaster
KobeKobe
to Sendai
to Sendai
to Kobeto KobeMinami SanrikuMinami Sanrikuto Kyoto
Sendaito Kyoto
Minami Sanriku-Cho Minami Sanriku-ChoSendai
Cho
Cho

to Minami
SanriSkaunriku To Kaminoyamato Minami
To KaminoyamaHachiman-Gu
Hachiman-Gu

9/189/18
Thu Thu

9/199/19
Fri Fri

9/209/20
Sat Sat9/219/21
Sun SunPolicyfor Risk
Policyfor RiskManagement
Management

PilotPilot
Project
Project

PilotPilot
Project
Project

DRMDRM

DMUCH
DMUCH

DMUCH
DMUCH

DMUCH
DMUCH

DMUCH
DMUCH

Recap
Recap

Recap
Recap

Recap
Recap

9/2 9/2
Mo Mo

9/239/23
Tue, Hoｌiday
Tue, Hoｌiday

The TheLast Last Depar
Depar
Presentation
Presentation tureture
DMUCH
DMUCH

to Kyoto
to Kyoto

Site Visit
5-2 5-2
Site Visit
Disaster
Reduction
Disaster
Reduction
Join theEventEvent
JoinFestival
the Festivaland Humanand Human
enovation
Institution
20
Renovation
Institution Lecture
Lecture 20
GreatGreat
East Japan
Theaterand 3D
Theaterand 3D East Japan
Earthquake
and Cultural
Earthquake
and Cultural Lecture
21-4 21-4
LectureHeritage
Heritage
Challenge
by theChallenge
by the(N.ITAYA)(N.ITAYA)
Lecture18 18
Community
LectureCommunity
Experienceof theof the(M.KUDO)
Experience(M.KUDO)
GreatGreat
Hanshin-Awaji
Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake,
Risk Risk
Earthquake,
Assessment
Assessment
To theTohotelthe hotel(Y.MURAKAMI,(Y.MURAKAMI,
Hyogo
Pref.)Pref.)Hyogo

Lecture26 26
LectureLecture24 24
LectureLecture30 30
LectureLearntfromfrom Lecture
28 28
Lessons
LearntLectureDisaster
Risk Risk Lessons
Disaster
MakingHistoric
CitiesCities
MakingHistoric
Process
Management
Systems
the Recovery
Process
Management
Systems
Management
for forthe Recovery
Management
Resilient
ResilientSouthSouth
Gate,Gate,
for Heritage
SitesSites
of Historicfor Heritage
Ayutthaya
World
AyutthayaWorldof Historic(J.VELASQUEZ,(J.VELASQUEZ,
SeoulSeoul(J.KING,
ICCROM)(J.KING,
ICCROM)
Heritage
Heritage
UNISDR)UNISDR)(H.SIRIPHATTHANAKUN)(S. JO)(H.SIRIPHATTHANAKUN)(S. JO)

Lecture31 31
Lecture23 23
LectureLectureLecture27 27
LectureGlobalInitiaitves
for for
Emerging
Policesfor forGlobalInitiaitves
Emerging
Polices
Post Post
DisasterDisasterDisaster
Risk Risk
Lecture25 25
Lecture29 29
Disaster
Risk Risk
Disaster
LectureLectureDisaster
Recoveryof Cultural
Recoveryof Cultural
Hague
Convention
of of
Can Rescue'Managementof of 'You 'You
Management
Can Rescue'
Hague
Convention Management
Management
Heritage
afterafter
Heritage(A.TAKAHASHI,
World
CulturalInitiative
Urban
CulturalWorld
CulturalInitiative(A.TAKAHASHI,
Urban
CulturalDujiangyan
Dujiangyan
UNESCO)
Heritage
UNAL)
Heritagein Japan
Heritage(Z.GULUNAL)
UNESCO)
Heritagein Japan (Z.GUL
Earthquake
Earthquake(G.BOCCARDI,(K.SHIMOTSUMA,(G.BOCCARDI,(K.SHIMOTSUMA,(Q.WEI)(Q.WEI)UNESCO
WHC)WHC)ACA Japan)
UNESCOACA Japan)

Lecture22 22
LectureCultural
Perspectives
Cultural
Perspectives
Lecture19 19
Lecturein
Post
Disasterin
Post
Disaster
Planning
for
Disaster
Planning for Disaster
Site Visit
5-1 5-1
Site Visit
RecoveryRecovery
Mitigationof Cultural
Mitigationof Cultural
MinamiSanriku-Cho
MinamiSanriku-Cho (W.CHEEK)(W.CHEEK)
Heritage
Trainingof ofHeritage
Training
Aﬀectedby theAﬀectedbyEastthe East
Heritage
Manager
Heritage
ManagerJapanJapan
DisasterDisaster(Y.MURAKAMI,(Y.MURAKAMI,
LunchLunch(Y.HIRAOKA)(Y.HIRAOKA)
Hyogo
Pref.)Pref.)Hyogo

LunchLunch

LunchLunch

Lunch
Lunch

Lunch
Lunch

Lunch
Lunch

LunchLuJICA
nch JICA

LunchLunch

Site Visit
4 4
Site Visit
AfterAfterthe Kobe
the Kobe
Earthquake
Site Site
Earthquake

CaseCase
StudyStudy(Resource
Persons)(Resource
Persons)

Workshop
6 6
Workshop
Lecture21-1
Lecture21-1 Integrating
CulturalIntegrating
Cultural
Post Post
Disasterand and Heritage
Disasterin thein the
Heritage
Recovery
Process,
Recovery
Process,Recovery
of Minami
Recoveryof Minami
Challenge
by theChallenge
by theSanriku-Cho
Sanriku-Cho
Government
Government(Y.HIRAOKA)(Y.HIRAOKA)
Site Visit
4 4
Site Visit
Lecture21-2
Lecture21-2
AfterAfterthe Kobe
the Kobe Challenge
fromfrom
the theChallenge
Earthquake
Site Site
Earthquake
Environment
Environment(K.GOTO)(K.GOTO)
Lecture21-3 21-3
LectureChallenge
by theChallenge
by theReconstruction
Reconstruction
Network
Network(H.OIKAWA)(H.OIKAWA)
to Sendai
to Sendai

StudyStudy
Project
CaseCase
StudyStudy
Project
StudyStudy
Project
Project
ProjectCaseCase
Project CaseCase
WorkWork
WorkWork
WorkWork
The Last
The Presentation
Last Presentation

Preparation
for thePreparation
for theLast Presentation
Last Presentation

to Sendai
to Sendai

Discussion
Discussion

FarewellFarewellPartyParty

SendaiSendaiMinamiSanriku-Cho
MinamiSanriku-Cho

SendaiSendai

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

Organized
by Instituteof Disaster
Mitigation
Urban
Cultural
Heritage,
Ritsumeikan
University,
Kyoto,Japan
Organized
by Instituteof Disaster
Mitigation
for for
Urban
Cultural
Heritage,
Ritsumeikan
University,
Kyoto,Japan
In Cooperation
with
UNESCOWorld
Heritage
Centre,ICCROM,
ICOMOS/ICORPIn Cooperation
with
UNESCOWorld
Heritage
Centre,ICCROM,
ICOMOS/ICORP
Supportedby Toyota
Foundation"Initiative
Program"
Supportedby Toyota
Foundation"Initiative
Program"23

2 Formulating Disaster
Risk Management Plans ofHistoric Cities2.1 Historic Centre of Gjirokastra, Albania
Elena MAMANI
Project Manager, Deputy Head of Office,Cultural Heritage without Borders (CHwB), Albania

1. Introduction
Gjirokastra is one of the most important cultural cities in Albania. In the year 1961, it was
proclaimed a Museum City (Decision of the Council of Ministers of Albania Nr. 172, Dt. 02.06.1961)
for its unique and rich cultural heritage. Gjirokastra’s historic monuments are classified as either
1st category or 2nd category monuments. There are 56 1st category monuments, 540 2nd categorymonuments, and approximately 1,200 stone buildings throughout the city (Fig. 1).

Historic Centre
Buffer Zone
Fig. 1

In 2005, the historic core of Gjirokastra was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, underCriterion (iii) and (iv). According to their description:
The old city of Gjirokastra is an exceptional testimony to a long-lasting, and almost disappearedsociety and life-style, influenced by the culture and tradition of Islam in the Ottoman period. The
historic town of Gjirokastra is a rare example of a well-preserved Ottoman town, built by farmersof large estates, around the 13th-century citadel. The architecture is characterized by theconstruction of a type of tower house (Turkish ‘kule’), of which Gjirokastra represents a series ofoutstanding examples (http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/569).
2. Attributes and Values
Gjirokastra is located in South Albania, in a strategic position above the Drino valley, where there
are testimonies of very ancient and important civilisations (i.e. the ancient cities of Antigonea,
Hadrianopolis, and Melan). It was built by major landowners and used as an important
administrative centre for centuries. The historic values of the city are derived from its long andbrilliant history but also from its monuments and dwellings which are still very well preserved.
Gjirokastra has inherited a large number of monument buildings including a citadel, vernacularhouses and religious buildings. The historic centre contains 7 neighbourhoods situated around thecastle (referenced by Evlija Celebi in the 17th century) and the town bazaar.

26

2.1 Historic Centre of Gjirokastra, Albania

The architectural values of the city are not only observable in the characteristics of well-preserved
individual monuments, but are also seen in the urban architectural-historical complexes of thebazaar and surrounding neighbourhoods. Important contributions to Gjirokastra’s architecturalvalues include the landscape and arrangement of houses, the organization of the historicneighbourhoods, the cobble-stone streets, and the preservation of these aspects and of the city
as a whole. Additionally, individual monuments have high technical and aesthetical values. The
materials and the techniques used in their construction prove the high knowledge of the craftsmenof that time regarding the characteristics of the materials and construction techniques. Exemplaryof this fact are the beautifully carved ceilings and wooden doors and the colourful paintings of thefacades and guest rooms in some of the most well-preserved monument houses (Fig. 2).

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

Fig. 2 Panoramic photo of the city (left) [photo Kreshnik Merxhani], The castle (right) [photo Alket Islami]

In addition to the city’s historic and architectural values, Gjirokastra also has important social
values that are a testimony to the lifestyle of people in the late medieval period and special
influence of Ottoman traditions. The almost unchanged shape of the city and the well-preserved
interiors of individual monuments can tell us a lot about the way people were living in that time andabout their habits and everyday routines (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 Interior of Skenduli house [photo Kreshnik Merxhani]27Considering these important and unique values the city has a big potential for tourism andeconomic development. Tourism has increased since the city’s inscription on the list of UNESCOWorld Heritage Sites. Indeed, the economic potential of Gjirokastra is evidenced by the growing
number of visitors every year. Increased tourism is an important economic resource for the ownersof historic monuments, responsible institutions and the city as a whole.
3. Natural disasters - Hazards and Vulnerabilities
Gjirokastra’s historic zone is vulnerable to a range of natural disasters and human interferences.
The political and economic situation in Albania over the last 20 years, coupled with the sheer
number of monuments, unresolved ownership issues, and the emigration of the city’s residents
are some of the main reasons for the lack of preservation and rapid deterioration observablethroughout the city.
Although there is no recorded evidence of damage due to seismic activity, the city is located in ahigh risk seismic zone, and is thus vulnerable to earthquakes. Traditionally, the stone structuresof the buildings were reinforced by wooden ties in addition to the ancillary support of the floors,ceilings, and roof which together functioned as an earthquake-resistant structural design. The
difficulty of maintaining the wooden earthquake-resistant elements, inappropriate restorationinterventions, as well as poor maintenance or negligence contribute to increased vulnerability ofhistoric monuments to earthquakes and other seismic events.
Another natural hazard to the city’s monuments is fire. Despite the stone construction of thefoundation and exterior, the interiors are wooden and thus vulnerable to fire. Poor electricalinstallations, exposed un-grounded electric cables, overgrown vegetation, scattered garbage, anduninhabited or abandoned houses are in risk of fires. Considering the lack of effective firefighting
mechanisms and personnel, unreliable water supply, as well as the barriers to quick responsesuch as hilly terrain and narrow streets, fire is a big risk to the built heritage of Gjirokastra.
Landslides are a less common natural hazard but also pose a potential threat especially given
the rate of deforestation, unregulated development and construction projects, and the effects ofclimate change which include more frequent and heavy rains (Table 1).

Table. 1

28

2.1 Historic Centre of Gjirokastra, Albania

4. Human interferences - hazards and vulnerabilities
Another, perhaps more costly threat to the Museum City of Gjirokastra, is human caused. The
effects of human interventions or negligence is often less drastic and less apparent but can beequally as damaging in the long term in comparison to natural hazards. Inappropriate restoration
practices, lack of maintenance, abandonment and illegal interventions both increase vulnerabilityof monuments to earthquakes and detract significantly from the buildings’ authentic values. In thisway, human interactions with the city’s built heritage can be equally as disastrous as earthquakes,
fires, and landslides (Table 2, Fig. 4).
Table. 2

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

Fig. 4 Second category monument, abandoned [photo Elena Mamani]29

5. Mitigation Measures
Planning preventive measures for disasters, either natural or human caused, requires action
at different levels and times. There is a need to increase the awareness within the community
and among responsible institutions (both local and national) and to develop a Disaster Risk
Management Plan (Table 3).
Table. 3

6. Emergency Preparedness and Response
Emergency preparedness addresses response protocol during a disaster. At this stage, the mostimportant step in developing an emergency response plan is determining appropriate evacuation
procedures. The evacuation plan should include the creation of evacuation routes and safe zones
in addition to the placement of clear signs throughout the city. In the event of a disaster, it will be
important to have an emergency team which will include specialists from responsible institutions
as well as trained community members. Coordination of the emergency team and respective
institutions is the key to a successful evacuation (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5 Emergency Team30

2.1 Historic Centre of Gjirokastra, Albania

7. Recovery activities
Following a disaster, recovery activities should include an assessment of the damage and plans for thereconstruction. These activities should be guided by prioritizing needs, feasibility of reconstruction,and strengthening existing and future response mechanisms. Planning and reconstruction should
be conducted according to short, mid and long term activities. It is important to designate theinstitutions and bodies responsible for the implementation of each activity.
Short term actions:・Rescue (Fire department, Ambulance Services, Volunteers)
・Cleaning the affected areas, removal of debris (Under supervision of heritage specialists)
・Damage assessment of the built heritage (DRKK/IMK/NGO, International experts)

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

Midterm actions:・Proposal for emergency interventions / Budgeting (DRKK/IMK/NGO, International experts)
・Fundraising (Government/Private/Organizations)・Propping the damaged buildings, light roof covering (Restoration Companies under theSupervision of DRKK)Long term actions:・Develop strategy for restoration interventions DRKK/Municipality/IMK/NGO/Government)
・Educational and awareness workshops with the community (Prefecture/Municipality/DRKK/
NGO)・Restoration and Reconstruction of damaged heritage buildings and the natural environment(Restoration companies)
・Rehabilitation of damaged infrastructure installation (Municipality)
・Continuous maintenance of the monuments (Owners)
・Build a DRM Plan of the site (Local and central responsible institutions
Pilot project:
The first step to be implemented is a survey of the current status of historic monuments. The survey
would be a risk assessment of 1st and 2nd category monuments in Gjirokastra’s historic zone.
The results of the survey will be summarized in a report that will be used to alert the government
about the state of the risk of historic monuments and devise a set of specific strategies relating to
the World Heritage Site of Gjirokastra.
Additionally, DRM plans will be introduced through lectures in Regional Restoration Camps (RRC)
organized by CHwB, as a needed tool to protect Cultural Heritage from Disasters. Regional
Restoration Camps are training courses on conservation of CH, organised 5 times per year in 4
different countries around the Balkans. They gather students and young professionals from all overthe Balkans and around the world. Camps will be used as an opportunity to raise the awareness andaddress the need of preparing and implementing DRM Plans in their respective countries.
References
1）http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/569
2）Notes from lectures during UNESCO Chair Programme on Cultural Heritage and Risk Management,International Training Course (ITC) on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage 20143）Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage in Urban Areas – A Training Guide, R. Jigyasu,
V. Arora, Research Centre for Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan
University, Kyoto, Japan.

31

2.2 Disaster Risk Management Planning for Cultural Heritage Sites
in Australia: Case Study - The Rocks, Sydney, Australia
Catherine FORBES
Built Heritage Advisor, GML Heritage; Australian Institute of Architects,
Australia ICOMOS, Australia

1. The Australian Context
In her iconic Australian poem, My Country, Dorothea Mackellar describes a land that is almost
synonymous with disaster - severe droughts, floods, fires and famines1). She writes:…..
I love a sunburnt country,
A land of sweeping plains,
Of ragged mountain ranges,
Of droughts and flooding rains.
I love her far horizons,
I love her jewel-sea,
Her beauty and her terror The wide brown land for me!
…..
Core of my heart, my country!
Land of the Rainbow Gold,For flood and fire and famine,
She pays us back threefold …..
Although many Australians may feel the same attachment to the land that Dorothea Mackellar
writes about, most Australians live on the edge of the island continent, in cities that are far removed
from the land that she describes. Even so, for the edge dwellers, severe climatic hazards suchas cyclones, hailstorms, heat waves and other extreme weather events are regular phenomena.
Savage winds, flash floods and wild fires extend their fingers right into the hearts of our cities.
Because Australia is so large, spanning many climatic zones, flood, cyclone and fire can all be
raging simultaneously across vast areas of land. Such factors stretch our emergency services
to their absolute limits. Other less frequent natural hazards such as earthquake, tsunami andlandslide, and human hazards such as industrial accidents and mine subsidence, also contributeto the risks that Australians face.
With each incident, Australia has developed and refined an efficient emergency response using
both professional and well trained volunteer services. Even so, disaster still strikes with the lossof life, property, livelihoods and our cultural heritage. Although we have emergency plans for all
types of disaster, very few include consideration of the cultural heritage that may be impacted by
the disaster or the response to it. Nor do they consider the sense of loss that is experienced by thepeople when their heritage and connection to their past is destroyed.
Similarly, although Australia has developed strong heritage management principles and practices,most of our heritage places rarely consider the impacts of disaster in their management planning.
Or if they do, it is not discussed or coordinated with the emergency services that will provide theresponse in a given situation. It is rare that an adequate methodology is developed and integrated
into the management of a heritage site during and after a disaster.

32

2.2 DDisaster Risk Management Planning for Cultural Heritage Sites in Australia: Case Study The Rocks, Sydney, Australia

2. Case Study - The Rocks, Sydney
This case study looks at the potential hazards that affect Sydney, Australia’s oldest and largest
city. The risks to its cultural heritage, in particular to the historic urban precinct of The Rocks,
and potential mitigation strategies for reducing the impacts of disaster on heritage attributes andvalues are considered, as are ways of coordinating with the local community, government anddisaster specialists to ensure that the heritage values of the place are protected before, during andfollowing a disaster.
The Rocks is currently managed by the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority (SHFA), on behalf of
the NSW State Government who owns the majority of the properties within the precinct.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

3. Geographic Context
The Rocks is located on the edge of Sydney Harbour, at the foot of the Sydney Habour Bridge andoverlooking Circular Quay and the Sydney Opera House. It is within the buffer zone of the Sydney
Opera House World Heritage site, and inversely, the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge and theharbour all form part of the buffer zone for The Rocks. This buffer zone also includes Observatory
Hill, the neighbouring residential area of Miller’s Point and the port area of Walsh Bay, which all
occupy the same headland and, to some extent, share the same history (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 The Rocks Urban Heritage Precinct, outlined in yellow, is located on the edge of Sydney Harbour
Its buffer zone including Circular Quay and the Sydney Opera House to the east, Sydney Harbour Bridge and Milson’s Point to the north, andObservatory Hill, Millers Point and Walsh Bay to the west, is outlined in green. The heritage attributes referred in this study are shown in red.
Elevated roads enclose the precinct to the south and west. (Adapted from Google Maps satellite image, dated 10 September 2014)

4. Historic Context
The Rocks is the site of first white settlement in Australia, although for our Aboriginal people it isregarded as the place of invasion. It is the place where, in 1788, convicts were first put ashore onto
the rocky outcrops at the edge of Sydney Cove to establish the new British colony of New South
Wales. It was a penal colony without walls and the convicts became active contributors to thecreation and success of the settlement that has since become the thriving City of Sydney2).

33

In the early years of settlement The Rocks was the economic centre of the new colony. As theprincipal port, it was the place of trade as well as the place of arrival for new immigrants. Gradually,small wattle and daub cottages replaced the original tents, and in turn these were replaced bymore substantial tenement row houses, shops, hotels, port facilities and warehouses. Following an
outbreak of Bubonic Plague in 1900, the whole area, including Millers Point, was resumed by the
NSW Government to raze the unsanitary housing that had developed and to extend the commercial
and port facilities. Although many houses were demolished for larger scale development, including
the construction of the Sydney Harbour Bridge (1925-1932), examples of all building types andstages of development still survive within the historic precinct and now provide a stark contrast to
the modern city adjacent (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 View looking southeast over The Rocks heritage precinct towards Circular Quay andSydney's central business district

When major redevelopment and modernization was again proposed during the 1950s and 1960s,
The Rocks became one of the first places in Australia where Australians recognized, stood up for
and fought to save their heritage through a series of public protests and Green Bans, imposed by
the Builders Labourers’ Federation on all demolition work. Thus, The Rocks has survived and is
now an area much loved by Sydney siders, who continue to fight to save the buildings within its
boundaries, including most recently the former Maritime Services Building, now occupied by theMuseum of Contemporary Art (Refer to Fig. 8).
5. Geological Context
The Rocks was named for the geological foundations on which it was established. The sandstone
bedrock and outcrops onto, into and out of which the new settlement was constructed still
dominate the urban landscape. Despite several attempts to give the area a new name, ‘The
Rocks’ remains.
6. Social and Economic Context
With over 14 million visits per year3). The Rocks is a thriving tourist destination for both local andinternational visitors. Linking two of Sydney’s cultural icons, the Sydney Opera House and theSydney Harbour Bridge, the area contains many restaurants, hotels, retail outlets, offices, street
markets (food and crafts), art galleries and museums. The area also contains public housing
accommodating both elderly and disabled residents, mainly on the higher slopes. Although thecargo ships that docked at The Rocks have now been relocated to Port Botany, the place stilloverlooks the busy commuter ferry wharves of Circular Quay and provides port facilities for large34

2.2 DDisaster Risk Management Planning for Cultural Heritage Sites in Australia: Case Study The Rocks, Sydney, Australia

cruise ships during the summer months (Refer to Fig. 2).
The Rocks is a place where the people of Sydney go to celebrate as well as to enjoy catching up
with friends over a meal. It provides a stage for special events such as Vivid (the annual winterfestival of light) and a viewing platform for the crowds who come to watch the fireworks over the
harbour on New Year’s Eve and Australia Day. It is also a place where people come to celebrate
their own personal special occasions. The Rocks is alive 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and 365
days a year.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

7. Heritage Values
The Rocks is of national heritage significance to the people of Australia. It has historic value as
the site of first white settlement or place of invasion. But more than this, the precinct encapsulates
the history of Sydney within its boundaries as it retains examples of all types and stages ofdevelopment from the first convict settlement to the contemporary city, providing a rich backdrop
to the activities that occur within it.
The sandstone materiality of the site, the complex and chaotic pattern of streets and narrow
laneways that respond to its rugged terrain, the richly layered streetscapes with their variety ofbuilding types and the views over the busy working harbour to the Sydney Opera House and theSydney Harbour Bridge give The Rocks exceptional aesthetic and architectural values (See Fig. 3).
In addition, as a tourist destination the place has high economic value and as a place ofcelebration and contemporary social activity The Rocks has a very high social value to the peopleof Sydney.

Fig. 3 View looking north along George Street to the Sydney Harbour Bridge and northeast
over Circular Quay to the Sydney Opera House

8. Heritage Attributes
The Rocks contains many attributes that are listed as heritage items on the NSW State Heritage
Register (SHR) 4). Heritage attributes considered for the purposes of this study include:
・Cadman’s Cottage, the former coxswain’s barracks and the oldest surviving building in The
Rocks precinct, built 1816 (Fig. 4);
・Unwin’s Stores, a terrace of five shop tenement houses, built during the 1840s to service thesailors and new immigrants arriving at the wharves located along The Rocks shoreline (Fig. 5);
・Campbell’s Stores, a row of ten substantial stone warehouses, built during the 1850s adjacentto the first private wharf in the city and the only surviving nineteenth century warehouse groupwithin the precinct (Fig. 6);35

・the Argyle Cut, carved by the convicts through the sandstone ridge to provide access to theneighbouring Millers Point (Fig. 7);・the sandstone sea wall, constructed from the rock removed from the Argyle Cut to contain abroad flat area of reclaimed land created to extend the deep water port facilities of the city (Fig.
6);
・the archaeological remains of the first government dockyard located below First Fleet Park, theMuseum of Contemporary Art (Fig. 8) and the bottom end of Argyle Street, as well as those
associated with Cadman’s Wharf and Campbell’s Wharf; and・the narrow lanes and stairs that provide the vertical connection between the streets running
north south following the natural contours of the site (Fig. 9 and 10).

Fig. 4 Cadman's Cottage, former coxswain's barracks, and archaeological site ofCadman's wharf

Fig. 5 Unwin's Stores, terrace of five shop houses, George Street362.2 DDisaster Risk Management Planning for Cultural Heritage Sites in Australia: Case Study The Rocks, Sydney, Australia

Fig. 6 Campbell's Stores located on reclaimed land behind a stone sea wall

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

Fig. 7 The Argyle Cut, Argyle Street

Fig. 8 Museum of Contemporary Art, located on the archaeological site of the first
Government dockyard

37

Fig. 9 Suez Canal pedestrian lane linking Harrington Street and George
StreetFig. 10 The Argyle stairs linking Argyle Street to Cumberland Street

9. Hazards and Two Disaster Scenarios
For the purposes of this study two disaster scenarios are considered. The first is associated withthe most common natural hazard to affect Sydney, that of a severe hailstorm. Although costly
in terms of the damage that it can reek on the historic fabric of the precinct, both in the shortand the long term, the impacts arising from this type of event should generally be recoverable, if
well managed. The second scenario to be considered, with a potentially much more disastrous
outcome for the heritage values of The Rocks, is that caused by an earthquake, which is likely to beaccompanied by fire.
Severe storms accompanied by lightning strikes, torrential rain, gale force winds and large hail area regular occurrence in Sydney, bringing with them flash floods, fallen trees, twisted power lines andsmashed roofs. The damage bill from the Sydney Hailstorm of 1999, during which 9cm hailstones
damaged 20,000 properties and 40,000 vehicles, was in excess of $1.7billion, making it the most
costly disaster in Australian history to that date5). According to the CSIRO the number of large haildays experienced on the east coast of NSW has been steadily increasing over recent years6).
Climate data shows that wind gusts can reach up to 150km per hour and that on at least threeoccasions in the last 150 years (1861, 1950 and 1990) rain has fallen well in excess of 600mm within
a 24 hour period7).
Sydney is located in a moderate earthquake hazard zone8). Although there have been no major
earthquakes within the Sydney Basin in recent history, hundreds of smaller quakes have beenrecorded9). In addition, significant quakes (magnitude 5.6 on the Richter scale) have been recorded
around the edges of the Sydney Basin at Penrith (western Sydney) in 1899, Bowral, Robertson and
Picton (southwest of Sydney) in 1961 and 1973 and in Newcastle in 1989. This last event caused
considerable loss of life and damage to the built heritage of the city. The relatively short history ofEuropean settlement in Australia means that there is a general lack of data available to determine
the likelihood of larger quakes within the Sydney Basin. Recent studies, however, indicate that theyshould be anticipated, especially considering the fault zones crisscrossing the city. Of particularinterest are the GPO Fault Zone that lies immediately below the city centre and the Luna Park Fault
Zone located just across the harbour at Milson’s Point10).
Other potential hazards that could be considered for Sydney and The Rocks include tsunami, rising38

2.2 DDisaster Risk Management Planning for Cultural Heritage Sites in Australia: Case Study The Rocks, Sydney, Australia

sea levels and fire. Over the last 150 years only relatively minor tsunamis have been recorded at Fort
Denison in the centre of Sydney Harbour11). However, geological evidence indicates that muchlarger events have occurred in the past. It is predicted that an earthquake on the west coast of New
Zealand could result in very substantial waves hitting the NSW coast at the entrance to Sydney
Harbour and measuring up to 3m at The Rocks, which is located 7km from the coast12). Rising sea
levels provide a slow onset hazard that will impact low-lying areas around the edges of Sydney
Harbour, including the reclaimed land along the foreshore of the Rocks Precinct13). Building fires
have also been a regular occurrence in The Rocks, as in any urban area, with houses, workshops
and warehouses all affected.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

10. Vulnerabilities, sensitivities and risks to heritage values
The built heritage in The Rocks precinct is vulnerable to damage during a severe hailstorm
through the susceptibility of its slate roofs to large hail damage, the tall chimneys to lightning
strike and the below ground basements and enclosed areas to flooding. This is the case forseveral of the heritage attributes including Campbell’s Stores, Unwin’s Stores and Cadman’s
Cottage. The risk of damage is increased for Campbell’s Stores by its location on low lying
reclaimed land that is vulnerable to storm surge, particularly at high tide, and its location adjacent
to a floodway. Cadman’s cottage is at high risk because of its location in a flood storage area14).
The poor condition of some of the buildings, lack of maintenance of gutters and drains and poor
management practices of tenants add to the risk of damage to the heritage fabric15).
Many of the buildings in The Rocks are vulnerable to earthquake due to their unreinforced block
masonry construction. Although some of the buildings have been strengthened in recent years
when conservation works have been carried out, many have not and are at risk of collapse. Of
particular concern are the tall power station chimney that stands high above the precinct andthe buildings that are in poor condition, such as Campbell’s Stores, which is suffering extensive
deterioration from salt attack and is in desperate need of repointing. Adding to the risks, when
considering safe evacuation of people and access to The Rocks by emergency services are thenarrow laneways and stairways that connect the low ground to the high as these are likely to be
blocked by fallen debris, the impenetrable high rock faces and other barriers that surround theprecinct and limit egress from the area, and the elevated roadways and railway that enclose thearea, which, if they fall, will block all exits. If the sea wall collapses, the risks to archaeological sites
located within the reclaimed land along the foreshore and the buildings located on this land will
also be increased.
Considering the density of development within The Rocks, the loss of heritage values (historic,
aesthetic, architectural, economic and social) will be high, not only as a result of building collapse,
but also fire. The use of automatic alarms and sprinkler systems as fire mitigation measures wasrecorded as early as 1928 in The Rocks in the case of the Government Printing Office fire in
Campbell’s Stores16). Most buildings in The Rocks precinct have been upgraded to meet modernbuilding codes and thus include fire rated construction, compartmentalization, fire isolated stairs
and exits, as well as a full suite of fire warning and suppression systems. However, in the eventof earthquake, many of these may not function as intended. Although the alarm systems aredesigned to operate on backup batteries and will notify NSW Fire and Rescue located just outside
the precinct at Millers Point, water pipes may be broken preventing the activation of sprinklers andhydrants, and failure of the masonry walls will compromise the fire barriers that exist between thebuildings as well as prevent access to the site by the fire brigade. Adding to the risk is the potential
rupture of gas pipes, damage to electrical wiring and disturbance of cooking facilities in the many
kitchens located throughout the precinct. Cadman’s Cottage, although separated from otherbuildings within the precinct, is particularly vulnerable due to its timber shingled roof, which issurrounded by trees. Also at risk are the collections stored within the buildings, including historical
records, archives, artwork and artifacts.
Safe evacuation of the area is complicated by the need to guide large crowds of visitors, both local

39and international, out of the area, particularly when there are special events occurring within the
precinct and market stalls may be obstructing the main evacuation routes of George and Argyle
Streets (Fig. 11).

Fig. 11 Food markets in Argyle Street

11. Mitigation strategies
Mitigation strategies that may be implemented by SHFA (as owner of the properties and manager ofthe precinct as a whole) to reduce the risks to heritage fabric and values associated with the onsetof a severe hailstorm should include:
・Installing lightning protection to vulnerable structures where this does not already exist;
・Ensuring that buildings are made watertight by undertaking essential roof and drainage repairs;
・Redirecting surface water away from buildings and low lying areas around buildings;
・Improving drainage systems from low lying areas;
・Educating tenants on the maintenance of gutters and drains, identifying the potential losses ifthey are not maintained; and・Inspecting the buildings and drainage systems to ensure that the tenants are meeting theirmaintenance obligations as set out in their lease agreements.
Mitigation strategies to reduce the risks associated with earthquake and fire should include:
・Providing seismic upgrades to buildings that have not been upgraded to date, prioritizing
buildings that are at greatest risk or pose the greatest danger;
・Ensuring that all fire systems are well maintained by requiring annual testing and certification;
・Ensuring that all kitchen and outdoor cooking facilities have fire extinguishers on hand and thattenants are trained in their use;
・Ensuring that trees do not overhang the shingled roof of Cadman’s Cottage and providing an
external water shield to protect the building;・Providing training to disaster management wardens and first aid officers;
・Providing a secondary water supply within or in close proximity to the precinct. This would
need to be coordinated with Sydney Water and may include provision of a secondary hydrantor pump system that uses water from the harbour if necessary;
・Providing appropriate strengthening to the sea wall to ensure structural stability; and・Investigating the seismic capacity of the surrounding elevated roadways and railway, providing
strengthening if required. This would need to be undertaken by Roads and Maritime Services.

40

2.2 DDisaster Risk Management Planning for Cultural Heritage Sites in Australia: Case Study The Rocks, Sydney, Australia

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

12. Preparation
In preparing for a potential disaster, SHFA needs to engage with the local community, tenants,business owners, the City of Sydney, disaster response agencies (NSW Fire and Rescue, NSW
Police, NSW State Emergency Services and NSW Ambulance) and service providers (water, gas,
electricity) in formulation of an integrated Disaster Risk Management Plan (DRMP) for the precinct
as a whole. Discussions should identify potential issues and appropriate and coordinated responses
that accommodate the protection of the heritage values of the precinct throughout all stages of thedisaster risk management process as well as other interests.
Inviting key people to visit and experience The Rocks on an informal basis should help to develop
greater appreciation of the place and understanding of the potential loss to the community if the placeand its heritage values were to be destroyed. Discussions with local business owners regarding
the loss of both heritage and economic values should help to promote their maintenance of theproperties they occupy as well as harness their involvement in the development of risk mitigation
strategies. Local residents, including parents with small children, the elderly and disabled, should
also be included in collaborative workshops that explore mitigation strategies for protecting homes,
safe evacuation from the area and involvement in the recovery process following disaster.
Undertaking a coordinated disaster evacuation drill throughout the heritage precinct annually, that
includes residents, business tenants, visitors and the emergency response services, will be essential
to ensuring that locals are all aware of what they need to do, and for testing how visitors, unfamiliar
with the layout of the precinct, can be safely evacuated. Different procedures for different disaster
scenarios should be explored and tested. For example, in the case of tsunami, the evacuation
would need to be to high ground on Observatory Hill, whereas in the case of earthquake, due to thedanger of falling bridges over the evacuation routes, it may be safer for people to stay within the
precinct, gathered at designated assembly points to await evacuation by boat.
Within SHFA, teams need to be established that can oversee the development and implementationof the DRMP in preparation for disaster as well as during the response and recovery phases. Good
records of the heritage attributes within the precinct, in the form of surveys, inventories, photographs
and measured drawings, stored in safe locations on and off site, will be essential to a well-organizedrecovery and reconstruction.
13. Emergency Response
In Australia the disaster response can be swift, with all debris, including the physical remains of ourcultural and built heritage, being cleared away to make room for reconstruction and a fresh start.
The resulting disconnection between the people and the place that was once familiar and importantto them can contribute further to the grieving and sense of loss.
It is important that the SHFA teams are prepared well in advance of any disaster occurring, with
protocols and procedures clearly identified and rehearsed, taking into consideration the protocols
and procedures for disaster response set out in the Emergency Plans for the city17). Coordination
with the emergency services and the local council, through the Senior Emergency Coordinator isessential.
14. Recovery and Reconstruction
As soon as possible after the initial emergency response, it is important that Damage Assessment
and Artifacts Rescue teams are ready to act, to secure the affected sites and assess the damage. A
team comprising at minimum a structural engineer, conservation architect, builder or carpenter andarchaeologist will need to carry out the following tasks as quickly as possible:
・Secure the sites
・Undertake rapid assessment of the damage
・Stabilize any unstable structures
・Rescue, inventory, transport and store artifacts
・Remove building debris from the streets41

・Store the salvaged materials, preferably on site
・Undertake site and building surveys
・Prepare preliminary budgets for insurance claims or funding applications
・Investigate causes of failures
・Determine goals and priorities for reconstruction
Officers will be required to brief the media and liaise with members of the local community (bothresidents and commercial tenants).
Whereas professional and local community volunteers may assist in the initial response, the medium
and long term recovery and reconstruction phases will involve considerable input from local andstate authorities, as well as professional consultants. Emphasis will need to be placed on planningfor the future in collaboration with the local community, looking for ways to ‘build back better’ withsustainable and resilient solutions, but without compromising heritage values, and prioritizing works
to re-establish business and attract people back to the site, as well as re-house residents.
15. Where to from here ?
To date the DRMP for The Rocks is only conceptual, as there has been no direct input from SHFA or
the various other stakeholders that should be involved in its formulation, development, adoption andimplementation. The first step would therefore be to get them involved as they will experience loss
when disaster falls, and likewise, they will benefit from being well prepared.
Secondly, this DRMP has not been developed in consultation with the City of Sydney, which would
have an important planning and coordination role during and following an emergency, nor the
NSW State Government, which would also have considerable input into planning and funding therecovery. The heritage of The Rocks needs to be taken into consideration in their response andplanning processes. Thus, both levels of government must be included in discussions regarding thedevelopment and implementation of the DRMP.
Thirdly, it will be important to integrate heritage into the local Emergency Plans for the City ofSydney, including the various sub-plans for the different types of disaster. Unless this occurs andthe people involved in the disaster response and recovery sector are on board, it will be difficult
to fully implement the DRMP. There will be other priorities to be addressed, which are seen as far
more urgent and which may override or contradict the retention and conservation of The Rocks andits heritage values. It will be important that at all levels there is an awareness of the important rolethat heritage can play in cohering communities in times of crisis when all may appear lost. Heritage
provides a positive connection between the past, present and future, strengthens identity and cancontribute to a psychological safety net to improve recovery.
Fourthly, this case study addresses issues raised in an historic precinct that is majority owned andmanaged by government. In other areas of the city and other parts of Australia, our heritage isprimarily located within the private sector. Thus, strategies must be developed for the adoption ofdisaster risk management planning for cultural heritage within the private sector, possibly throughpublic-private partnerships. Even though government may be responsible for infrastructure, property
owners are responsible for the management, care and protection of their properties.
Given the risks associated with our unpredictable and harsh climate and geomorphologicalconditions, combined with our occupation along the coastal fringe, disaster risk management
planning for our most historic city needs to be considered as a vital and integral part of building ourresilience for the future.
References
1）Mackellar, D.: My Country, extract from poem originally published as Core of My Heart in London
Spectator Magazine,1908. Official Dorothea Mackellar Website, www.dorotheamackellar.com.
au/archive/mycountry.htm, accessed 20 October 201442

2.2 DDisaster Risk Management Planning for Cultural Heritage Sites in Australia: Case Study The Rocks, Sydney, Australia

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

2）Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority: The Rocks Heritage Management Plan, Volume 1, April
20103）Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority: Visitor Snapshot - The Rocks, June 2012 - July 2013
4）The SHR is a list of places and objects of particular importance to the people of NSW. NSW
Government, Environment and Heritage, What is the State Heritage Register? http://www.
environment.nsw.gov.au/heritage/listings/stateheritageregister.htm, accessed 31 October 20145）Australian Bureau of Meteorology: Summary of Significant Severe Thunderstorm Events in NSW
1990/2000, www.bom.gov.au/nsw/sevwx/9000summ.shtml, accessed 10 July 20146）CSIRO: Understanding Extreme Weather Changes, www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Environment/
Extreme-Events/Understanding-extreme-weather-changes/In-depth.aspx, accessed 10 July
20147）Australian Bureau of Meteorology: Monthly climate statistics from Observatory Hill, 1858 - 2014,www.bom.gov.au/nsw/sevwx/9000summ.shtml, accessed 10 July 20148）Casus Calamitus Consulting: 'An Earthquake in Sydney: could it happen here', in Disaster Risk
Management, 6 November 20139）Geoscience Australia: Potential geologic sources of seismic hazard in the Sydney Basin- Proceedings volume of a one day workshop, Editor: Dan Clark, Record 2009/11, GeoCat# 65991, Department of Energy, Resources and Tourism10）Smith, D.: 'Revealed: Sydney's Crack-up', Sydney Morning Herald, 22 October 200511）Australian Bureau of Meteorology: Past Tsunami Events, www.bom.gov.au/tsunami/history/
index.shtml, accessed 23 July 201412）Cardno: NSW Tsunami Inundation Modelling and Risk Assessment, Report prepared for NSW
State Emergency Service, 201313）Department of Environment: Climate Change and Water, Sydney Harbour - Sea Level
Rise Design Parameters, Draft Report, 201414）City Area Catchment Flood Study: draft report prepared by BMT WBM Pty Ltd for City of Sydney,
March 201415）Design 5 Architects, Campbell's Stores: Investigations of Potential Causes of Ground
Floor Rising Damp and Recommendations for Remedial Works, Report prepared for Sydney
Harbour Foreshore Authority, 12 June 200816）Evening News, 29 Sept 192817）Sydney CBD Emergency Sub-Plan: a State Level Sub-plan to the NSW State Disaster Plan
(Displan), 2005 - Note: This plan is currently under review; Sydney CBD Emergency SubPlan Addendum 1 - Moving People, 2005; Sydney CBD Emergency Plan Map, nd; http://
www.emergency.nsw.gov.au/content.php/535.html, accessed 31 July 2014; also NSW State
Emergency Management Plan, 2012; NSW State Storm Plan, 2013; Major Structure Collapse
Sub-plan, 2011; NSW State Flood Sub-plan, 2008; NSW Tsunami Emergency Plan, 2008 - All
sub plans have been prepared for the NSW Government43

2.3 Disaster Risk Management for the Historic for San Antoniodel Cerro de Oro de Zaruma
Juan Diego BADILLO REYES
Architect Conservator freelance, Volunteer South America Coordinator, Ecuador

1. Introduction
The city of Zaruma is located at the south of the country and is part of the province of El Oro in
the western Cordillera of the Andes; it is characterized by the irregularity of its geography and thesteep slopes on which the city stands.
This city has a total of 9281 inhabitants distributed in the two zones, 3549 in the first order and5732 in the buffer zone. About 24% of inhabitants in the region (canton) live in extreme poverty.
With an average temperature of 18 ° C to 24 ° C a humid subtropical climate predominates. The
city is visited annually by approximately 10,500 domestic and 1500 international visitors.
The first human settlements of Zaruma can be traced back to the era of 1500-500 B.C., and theirrich and diverse cultural expressions in archeological sites like Guayquichuma, Chepel, Payama,
Trencilla and San Antonio located in various natural settings are a testament to the creativity andactivities of previous inhabitants. It is also easy to find petroglyphs along the riverbanks and on
mountain peaks.
2. Main attributes
The core centre of the city has been listed as a potential world heritage site on the indicative listof the World Heritage Centre since 1998, although a final dossier for the candidature has not been
prepared yet.
The historical city center has the following main attributes:
Linking between the city and landscape
One of the main features is the natural landscape that mixes with the city so that it seems that thewild and natural vegetation acts as courtyards and gardens of the houses.
The immediate environment enters the buildings with different species of ornamental and medicinal
plants and the distant landscape becomes the scenery enjoyed from the windows of the rooms ofthe traditional houses.
Vocational and mining history of the town
Gold mining activities were occurring in Zaruma even before the Spanish conquest and the Incan
Empire. In fact, that the precious material would not only provide a name to the province where thecity is located, but it would be a major factor in the city’s development process.
Even until today, mining activities are part of everyday life, making it impossible to disassociate
Zaruma with the golden glow of that substance.
Its importance not only remains at the local level but also on the regional level, with trade routes
opened up with the other populated centers in the south like Cuenca and Loja. At the interregional
level, the gold of Zaruma became the currency required by the merchants transporting imported
products related to mining?tools, iron and mercury?thus fomenting trade between the Audiencia of
Quito and Lima.
Traditional architecture
Responding to the climate and geography of the area, local architecture in has developed in a
distinctive manner using local natural materials like wood (black guayacan, cedar, etc.). Thisarchitecture influenced construction in the area and still stands in the center of Zaruma where a44

2.3 Disaster Risk Management for the Historic for San Antonio del Cerro de Oro de Zaruma

few examples of wooden structures are challenging topography and time.
According to the latest national inventory, there are 209 properties, of which 90% are housing. Of
the aforementioned total, only 9% are in good condition, 65% are in fair condition and 26% arerated as in poor condition.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

3. Natural Disasters
According to local evidence, this area of the province of El Oro is prone to landslides and fires.
Generally, the city has suffered from heavy rains and landslides. Data has been collected since2007 showing annual disasters resulting in the loss of housing, road collapse and deterioration to
the slopes and therefore the visual form of the city. Since 2013 landslides have been more frequentand in 2014 there have been four major landslides in the canton already.
The average annual rainfall is between 2000 and 4000 mm, and there are two well-definedseasons: the rainy season from January to April, and the dry season from June to December.
Geologically, this zone belongs to a volcanic-sedimentary series that is strongly mineralized withmetallic sulfurs, whose relief is abrupt, with sharp, long and asymmetrical peaks. The highest
parts of the area are occupied by igneous terrain from the cretaceous or tertiary eras.
4. Risk Analysis
An analysis of the existing situation has been done but while the field of risk management offers
assorted diagnoses, maps, and contingency plans, none of them take cultural heritage into
account. For the most part, in this area, there are assorted incomplete diagnoses that do notprovide complete plans for mitigation of risk in the area
Most of the information found is partial or general information such as in the spatial development
plan or cantonal tourism plans and even at the level of the dossier for World Heritage site
candidacy there is only superficial information on risk management and this fails to link up withmanagement plans.
The latest diagnoses made by the university UTPL, the risk of fire or arson is not addressed.
It is worth mentioning that there is an organization comprising local institutions chaired by themayor and with the collaboration of the following agencies: GAD Zaruma (the municipality), theFire Department, the municipal social affairs committee (Patronato Municipal), Zaruma Hospital,
the civil service, Comisaría Nacional, National Police and Grupo de Caballeriía Blindada Febres
CorderoIn addition to the seven working groups proposed by the National Secretary of Risk Management(Water supply, Health and Sanitation, Infrastructure, Integral care for population, Security,
Productivity and Education, Environment and Cultural Heritage) for all communities, locally, moreareas of work fot disaster mitigation have been defined including: Shelter and Evacuation; Foodand Water; Economics and Public Communication.
Despite the apparent preparation, the city conducts no periodic drills, nor have the contingency
plans been widely publicized.
There is a weak linkage between the national and local office of the national risk authority (COE)and few or no activities have been established by the various working groups of the COE which
relate to the subject of cultural heritage.
5. Scenario
In the period from January to April, there were strong and constant rains, which caused earth
movement in the downtown area. The landslide carried away what was in its path and worsened
the situation by hitting the foundations of the houses which have been constructed with little orno technically resistant construction materials. For this reason, when a home plummets, it is likea domino effect, pushing the neighboring house and so all the houses on the block fall, causing
blockages in the streets that prevent the evacuation of the people.
Additionally, the poor condition of the electrical wiring generates a short-circuit and a fire thatquickly consumes the wooden structures and threatens to destroy the nearby properties.
45

Landslides also caused blockage of the only road to access to the city, when a water pipe broke
and water distribution was affected. Although there are two secondary roads, they aren’t in goodcondition and couldn’t be used to get help to the cut off towns.
Due to mining, there are voids underneath the lower levels which have on occasion resulted incollapses that destroy properties. This is the result of the poor condition of many properties andbecause of the replacement of basement structure. This has led to the loss of many properties.
Trash and debris from constructions block also possible evacuations routes, leaving people withno possibility to get the designated safety spots.
6. Vision of DRM and Statement of Goal
Zaruma will be an example of a historical city that has learned to live with disasters due to its
preparation and single management system in a country that takes cultural heritage into account in
its planning.
The DRM seeks to raise awareness of the importance of the protection of cultural heritage in risk
management, considering the significance and support that traditional knowledge can makebefore, during and after a disaster.
7. Partners and stakeholders identification
The possible and proposed partners and stakeholders are organized at international, national andlocal levels as follows:
International
ICOMOS, ICORP, World Heritage Centre, NGOs
National
ICOMOS ECUADOR, Secretaria Nacional de Gestión de Riesgo (COE), ARCOM [the Mining
Regulatory body], Instituto Nacional de Patrimonio Cultural (INPC) [National Cultural Heritage
Institute], Universities.
Local
Municipio de Zaruma [Municipality of Zaruma], Unidad de Gestion del riesgo [Risk Management
Unit], COE Zona 7, BIRA, Fire Department, Municipal Social Affairs Committee, Hospital Zaruma,
Civil Service, and Grupo de Caballeriía Blindada Febres Cordero.
8. Mitigation measurements
To define the measures to be taken to mitigate risk, it is necessary to consider the three themes, atthe strategic, the tactical and the operational level.
Short Term
Revision of the scope of the risk unit and its human resources needs.
Inclusion of the risk awareness within the cultural heritage programme for schools, artisan groups
and miners association.
Implementation of regular drills.
Memory as a tool to create awareness of a fire protection system.
Guidelines for maintenance of heritage wooden buildings. ie, non-inflammable material, materialchange in structures.
Regulation for new electric wiring.
Medium Term
Revision of the zoning and maximum allowed construction level.
Revision of plans and maps to include cultural heritage46

2.3 Disaster Risk Management for the Historic for San Antonio del Cerro de Oro de Zaruma

Reforestation based on the identification of native and invasive plant.
Maintenance of roads, especially secondary access especially JAN-APRIL
Restoration and reinforcement of the schools identified as shelters.
Long Term
Structural reinforcement of side walls for evacuation paths.
Back up water supply system.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

9. Emergency Preparedness and Response
In case of a disaster, the city will have means to alert the public. This will generally be throughspeakers located in churches and schools and an alert system through cell phones.
The city will complete the placement of signage on evacuation routes and safe sites that include
emergency kits with reflective vests that allow group leaders and evacuations managers to be
identified.
The main risk unit or command centre will be located in the Casa del Herrero, where the Risk Unit of
the municipality works but a second risk command centre needs to be considered out of town due
to the difficulty of access.
Emergency equipment for fire control should be installed at strategic locations, mainly in places witheasily accessibility and areas close to the main buildings and more vulnerable to fire (Fig 1).
Evacuation routes have been proposed by area, defining the corresponding quarters of the areas,
suitable routes and corresponding shelters and refuges as detailed in the attached Table 1.

Fig. 1 The emergency and preparedness and response chart for the city47

Table 1

Area

Neighbourhoods
El Calvario and La
Alborada

North

Route
Damián Meneses, La
Colina and Pichinchastreets.

Shelter and refuge
La Inmaculada School

La Colina, Pichincha,
Nacional 26 de
24 de Mayo and Tanques 10 de Agosto, Bolívar,Sucre and Av. Honorato Noviembre Schoolde AguaMárquez Streets
Cuatro Caminos andToscón Blanco

San Francisco andDamián Meneses
streets.

Rocafuerte

Rocafuerte and Justino Unidad Educativa San
Cornejo streets.
Juan Bosco School

El Oro Avenue

El Oro Avenue

Centro Escolar Guillermo
M a l d o n a d o Va l e n c i aSchoolSouth

Gonzalo Pizarro

Gonzalo Pizarro and
Dr. Marcelo Zambranostreets

Sultana de El Oro School

West

El Sexmo

El Minero, Cerro de Oro
Gabriela Mistral School
and Damián Meneses
streets.

CentreGabriela Mistral School

10. Recovery plan
The plan must consider that certain activities will not stop in the short term but will serve as feedback
for the mitigation and planning phases in the future.
Within the activities to be done, it is very important to consider fundraising, damage assessment,
revision of existent codes and regulations, among other activities. The recovery plan is proposed tobe accomplished via four focus areas.
①Utilities②People③Infrastructure④Cultural Heritage
11. Conclusion
The challenges for implementing a risk mitigation plan in this area are many, in particular, it isnecessary to work on the awareness, given the unfulfilled needs and the small annual budgets that
result in little being done in this field.
It is for this reason that small projects need to be started. The main objective is to raise awarenessand include the topic of risk management among the daily activities.
And these small activities will help to strengthen local capacity to monitor the activities of the risk
management plan with catalyst projects that will always be linked to the preparation of the city forpost-disaster times.
Activities designed as part of the DRM will not have just a single purpose but will be designed tomeet other demands of the population, including recreational and leisure purposes.
It is clear that at some point, the participation of the authorities at a local and national level will bemandatory in order to achieve the goals of this DRM to include the legal framework, the policies,
preventive maintenance, planning and capacity building.

48

2.3 Disaster Risk Management for the Historic for San Antonio del Cerro de Oro de Zaruma

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

12. Pilot Project
The title of the project is “Don’t be scared, be prepared!” and it has as its main objective to raiseawareness of the importance of mitigating risk while collecting information through old photographsand documents.
It will gather information that may be useful for activities in the DRM plans, information that canlead us to previous practices and that could raise awareness of past events and disasters and also
create a database with technical information if necessary for repair or reconstruction.
An exhibition of the material collected in areas assigned for shelters and safe areas identified in
evacuation plans will be made.
The intention is to familiarize people with the spaces as everyday referents as playful interaction andnot as areas associated with the disaster.
Further information will tell us the old methods of mitigation or disaster preparedness and ways ofliving with nature and mining in the area.
And, finally the documents will complement the existing database in the municipality and will enable
us to convert the information into technical data to be used for future interventions.
The exhibitions will be held outdoors and in different formats, mainly exhibitions of small and medium
format in shelters described in evacuation routes and spaces between buildings that would be
retrofitted to consolidate them as fast escape routes; and large format prints in areas where previous
disasters have happened and even with the passage of time have not fully recovered, for example,
the hill of El Calvario where the imprint of a landslide remains and the vacant lot near the main park
where a house was destroyed by fire.
In this way the project will raise people’s awareness of risk prevention and connect them to areasthat will be used in the future as evacuation routes and safety spots.

49

2.4 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan of a part ofHistoric Cairo
Abdelhamid SALAH EL-SHARIEF
Chairman of the Egyptian Heritage Rescue Foundation (EHRF), Egypt

1. Introduction to the city (Fig. 1)
During just a short walking through the streets of Historic Cairo you can go from a period to anotherwith its traditions, crafts, habits and most parts of it you can still recognize the fabric of the old city
(Fig. 2).
The property of Historic Cairo was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 19791), recognizing the“absolutely unquestionable historical, archaeological and urbanistic importance” of the historic cityof Cairo, based on the following criteria.
Several of the great monuments of Cairo are incontestable masterpieces.
The center of Cairo groups numerous streets and old dwellings and thus maintains, in the heart of
the traditional urban fabric, forms of human settlement which go back to the middle Ages.
The historic center of Cairo constitutes an impressive material witness to the international
importance, on the political, strategic, intellectual and commercial level, of the city during themedieval period.

Fig. 1 C. URCH project

Fig. 2 C. Save Cairo Initiative50

2.4 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan of a part of Historic Cairo

2. Formulating Disaster Risk Management study of the Historic City
Introduction
There is no doubt today that we need to formulate DRM plan for each historic city to set a list ofintervention priorities specially that each country is suffering because the lack of funding. And by
setting up DRM plan we can find the right strategy from short to long term based on the risks that
identified by the plan and the available financial sources.
Understanding the hazards and the vulnerabilities of the Historic Cairo to find the common sourcesof risk and weakness between its districts, streets, buildings, different attribute and even thesurrounding area will not be an easy task unless a detailed investigation should be done in eachzone of the city with understanding the community of each zone and its need. This is why the study
is focus on one pilot zone of the historic city (Fig. 3).
The vision of the study
To conserve the identity of the city and to find the potential factors to make it resilience
Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

The objective of the study
・Finding a sustainable plan to reduce the risks
・Matching the needs of the DRM plan with the surrounding communities.
・Raise the awareness of the need for DRM of Cultural Heritage among the stakeholders
・Conserving the identity of the city・Identifying the hazards which can cause risks to the city・Setting a list of priorities for the intervention
・Assessing the values of the city
・Finding the relation between the hazards and the vulnerabilities of the city
・Listing the roles of the involved stakeholders

Fig. 3 C. URHC Project

3. Potential Hazards:
The study is focusing just on the main hazards that can cause major loss of the values of thecity and each will be clarified with a chart to find out the relation between each hazard and site`svulnerabilities.

51

4. Earthquake (Fig. 4)
Cairo faces earthquakes in a significant magnitude and frequency, it was reported historically thatsome monuments have collapsed during historical earthquakes, the last significant earthquake
stroke Cairo in 1992 claiming lives of 500 people in Cairo, most of them in Historical areas due tolarge number of deteriorated buildings. Most monuments suffered different levels of destruction

Fig. 4 C. Author

5. Increasing subsurface water level (Fig. 5)
The high dam caused general increase in ground water level in most of Nile valley, before the dam,
Nile worked as a source of water during flood time and then acts as a drain for the rest of the year
after its level subsides. In addition to other factors affecting its subsurface water, urban expansion
of Cairo around the historical core caused extra inputs to the aquifer, garden irrigation and seepage
from water and sanitation systems and informal areas with no sanitation systems all contribute to thesubsurface water input.
Also we cannot ignore the lack of maintenance of the sanitation system (Fig. 6) to match the highpopulation of the area as well as the workshop activities, which also another source of increasing
the level of the subsurface water. As well as building the two lines of subway one of them going
through the Historic Cairo which needed to inject the soil with material to isolate the water aroundthe subway tunnels.

52

2.4 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan of a part of Historic Cairo

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

Fig. 5 C. Author

Fig. 6

6. Fire (Fig. 7)
Due to the vast amount of fire sources and fuels Fire is one of the most fatal threats to Historical
Cairo as well we the lack of mitigation and preparedness measures of firefighting as well as the low
accessibility for firefighting tracks (Fig. 8). In recent past some precious monuments was lost due tofire. Another reason is vacant Lands which are informally used as waste dumb, which may provide
a high risk of catching Fire (Fig. 9), also compact urban Fabric with attached buildings that causes
fast spread of fire from a building to another and what more is existence of illegal high rise buildings
in such narrow streets that can’t give access to firefighting vehicles, beside that the activity of someof the workshops that use natural gas and oxygen as source of fire to their activities.
In Historic Cairo people are leaving side by side in every part of the city, so they are facing the firerisk as well.

53

Fig. 7 C. Author

Fig. 8 C. T. Elmori542.4 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan of a part of Historic Cairo

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

Fig. 9 C. Author

7. New Un-planned, Illegal construction (Fig. 10)
After the revolution of 25th of January 2011 and due to the absent of the security as we as the legal
authorities that responsible of managing, protecting and securing the heritage properties in Egypt,
many illegal buildings have built side by side with the archeological areas and sites, even more thatit replaced them in some cases. Which cause much loss of many sites and decrease the value ofthe historical area.

Fig. 10 C. URHC project55

8. Terrorist Attacks:
Many terrorist attacks have hit some parts of historic Cairo and as a last big one in 24th January 2014
was targeting the main police station of Cairo which is existing in front of the Museum of Islamic Art– (Fig. 11, 12) one of the most important museums in the world- and caused some damage to thebuilding and many damages for the collections of the Museum.

Fig. 11 C. Author

Fig. 12 C. Author

9. Vulnerabilities of the site
By analyzing the hazards and studying its charts we find that each hazard can have major effectwhen it meets one or more vulnerabilities in the city. Sometimes a primary hazard due to hittingsome vulnerability can cause secondary hazards and from here we have to realize the importanceto identify the vulnerability in order to set up the DRM plan.
56

2.4 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan of a part of Historic Cairo

10. The mitigation plan
The Mitigation strategy should be set up based on the data collected in the risk assessment, thepriorities of the endanger heritage and understanding the economic situation of the country. The
strategy should be divided from short to long term by planning a sequence of preventive measuresand studying the role as well as the capacity of each involved party.
First: Identifying the involved parties and clarify its responsibilities.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

11. The involved parties
Some of the Vulnerabilities that the study brought it out
・The activity of the small workshops and cafes (Fig.13)
・Gas Cylinders storage
・Vacant lands used for garbage dumping
・Casting, welding or metal cutting workshops or similar workshops using fire・Areas not accessible to firefighting vehicles or any emergency support
・high rise buildings (above 5 stories)
・Ruins (may contain biological hazards such as snakes or rats...)・The conflict between the different authorities that control the Heritage in Egypt
・Buildings apparently collapsing (Fig.14)
・Buildings with excessive moister content
・Indoor water ponds (in basements or low level ground floors)
・Lack of Management for building and sites
・Lack of Maintenance in the level of sites and infrastructure
・Lack of community awareness・Building are so close from each other (Fig. 15)
・Incorrect restoration
・Lack of security
・No building codes for building and infrastructure that fit with the need of historical cities.
・No plan for reusing of the buildings

Fig. 13 C. W.Abu-Bakr

57

Fig. 14 C. W.Abu-Bakr

Fig. 15 C. W.Abu-Bakr

58

2.4 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan of a part of Historic Cairo

12. Local parties
Involved party

Responsibility

Ministry of Antiquities

Responsible of listed Historical sites and the security inside it

Ministry of Culturaloccupying some of listed Historical buildings to provide activities inside
those buildings

Ministry of Interior

The security of the surrounded area

Municipality

The infrastructure in the city and all the building that not listed

Ministry of Awkaf

Responsible most of Mosques and many other listed and historical buildings

Ministry of Defense

Responsible of the intervention in major disaster

NGOs

Some activity inside the sites and within the community

Community

Living around and inside the listed buildings in some cases

Beside the international involved parties such as UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOM and ICOMOS.
Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

13. The mitigation measures (Fig. 16)
The mitigation strategy will be based on the involving of the stakeholders and as mentioned abovethat community is leaving side by side with the heritage there, the community will have the main
involving as well as the active NGOs in the city.
The measures will start with advocating for national legal framework of disaster risk management
plan, then setting up the priority procedures, renew the infrastructure, reducing the vulnerability ofthe sites and the attributes with sustainable management that come out with integrated maintenancephases, design and reuse Derelict spaces and building, the adaption of the workshop activity
from unsecured to secured, maintenance of the roads and increase its accessibility, firefighting
System workshops for the community especially those who are using fire sources in their activities,
documentation of the sites and its collection, find and develop a database system for all the sites with
its objects. This database should include enough historical information, conservation work, historyof disaster that affected the area, retrofitting the existing building including listed and historicalbuildings as well as those building that exist in the buffer zone of each listed building.

Fig. 16 C. Author5914. Emergency Respond and Preparedness plan (Fig. 17)
Training staff to act as Heritage Rescue Team is very important to stop any further damage for the
Heritage and have the capability to intervene in any emergency situation can affect negative on
heritage (Fig. 18). And to lead the following steps:
・Prepare the evacuation plans for persons , objects and heritage fragments
・Increase the capacity respond of emergency team, NGOs and the community
・Prepare and setting up the fire distinguishers equipment
・Develop emergency plans and adapt it according to the risk assessment
・Organize simulations for different scenarios with including every partners
・Setting up the contact list in Case of Emergency

Fig. 17 C. Author

Fig. 18 C. Author60

2.4 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan of a part of Historic Cairo

15. Recover plan (Fig. 19)

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

Fig. 19 C. Author

16. Conclusions
Formulating DRM plan should be a task start from policy level to reach the community level,
distributing the responsibility between the involved stakeholders under a detailed DRM plan.
Existing of a developed database is needed with clear and documented information
A short term plan should start by increasing the awareness between the communities, reducing thevulnerability of the city with integrated conservation plan as well starting to develop reusing planof the sites with activities that finding the link between the heritage and the community and by thatsolution NGOs can start to support the government to increase the fund to maintain the heritage.
Reference:
1）ICOMOS Review Sheet on the Nomination of the Historical Center of Cairo on the World Heritage
List, April 10, 19792）Jigyasu, R: Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage in Urban Areas – A Training Guide,
Research Center for Disaster Mitigation of Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University,
Kyoto, Japan, 2013
3）UNESCO, Urban Regeneration Project for Historic Cairo, FIRST REPORT OF ACTIVITIES,July 2010-June 201261

2.5 Outline of a Disaster Risk Management Plan (DRM) of HistoricCentre. Tegucigalpa, Honduras
Cinthia CABALLERO
Urban control and planification unit, Alcaldia Municipal Del Distrito Central(Gerencia Del Centro Historico), Honduras

1. Introduction
Honduras is one of the most vulnerable countries to natural disasters in the Central American
region. The Central District or better known as Tegucigalpa, the Capital city of the country is
located in the central region, with approximately 1.3 million inhabitants. Choluteca River divides thecity from north to south, in what is called the twins city of Tegucigalpa and Comayaguela. The river,its irregular topography, geological and hydrological conditions, informal and uncontrolled rapid
growth and expansion are the principle agents that contribute for the city to be one of the mostvulnerable areas of the country.
It was until 2011, during the elaboration of the Municipal Development Plan, when the words risk
and hazards where taken in account, including a chapter for disaster risk management and an
urban planning thought on reducing the risks and vulnerabilities of the city. Nevertheless this plandidn´t involve the protection of Cultural Heritage on the aspects of natural disaster risks.
2. Studied Area for drafting the DRM and its significant Attributes and Values
As most of Latin American cities, Tegucigalpa has the Spanish configuration, with many churches
and plazas, surrounding them the local government buildings and houses of the political and highclass. Besides it, in 1880 when Tegucigalpa became the Capital City, all the Central Governmentbuildings where constructed and political and cultural activities regarding the country where
held in the city. These, among many other are issues that give the city’s Historic Centre cultural,tangible, movable and immovable attributes (Fig. 1).
In 1994 through agreement number 527, the central government declared the Historic Centre of theCentral District as a National Monument.
The attributes of the Historic Centre carry values that can be grouped as follows (Fig. 2):
・Architectural Value: The churches and the city configuration in itself have the characteristics thattell the story of the Colonial time. The Historic Buildings such as the City Hall, the first hospital(know the Museum of National Identity), the National Post Office still in use, have architecturalcharacteristics of the republican time. Vernacular buildings, most of them built during colonial
time, whose material of construction mark a special time in history of Tegucigalpa.
・Religious and Social Values: Six of the seven churches in the Historic Centre are still in use.
These buildings and the plazas in front of them are places for gathering. And the religious
activities that are held during the year are signs of the cultural value these assets have.
・Educational and Historical value: Most of the governmental buildings are used as museums
and/or libraries.
Many are the stakeholders that are involved in the protection of the attributes of the historic centre,
among them can mentioned: ministry of culture, local government, community, artists, ministry ofeducation, church, emergency response team, parliament.

62

2.5 Outline of a Disaster Risk Management Plan (DRM) of Historic Centre. Tegucigalpa, Honduras

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

Fig. 1 Location of Historic Centre of Tegucigalpa

Fig. 2 Attributes, Values and Stake Holders63

3. Hazards, Threats and Vulnerabilities
The lack of maintenance and poor state of conservation of many of the buildings make the attributesand values of this site vulnerable to any hazard. The potential hazards that may damage the site are
hurricanes, heavy rainfall, landslides, fire and earthquakes. And a slow and silent threat is the illegal
and informal urban developments along the river margins (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 Natural Hazard Risk Map

Heavy rainfall and flooding can weaken the buildings due to its material of construction (adobe- mudbased brick). The rainfall can cause landslides, being the most threatening the Berrinche Hill that
could destroy the buildings in the west part of the historic centre. Fire could destroy the roof andceiling structures which are made out of wood, and the heavy tiles would come down damaging
the adobe walls. Since there is no space between buildings if a fire starts it may spread through thewhole block very easily due to the flammable materials of the roof. Buildings might collapse during
an earthquake because of the none reinforced adobe structures and the cavity under the streets,due in part to the lack of maintenance of the old sewerage (immediate assessment about this has tobe done). The informal constructions along the river in case of a flood will be destroyed and all thedebris that the water brings will damage the historical buildings. Studies have indicated that without
the constructions along the river, in a flash flood the water will cover more than 30% of the historic
centre. The condition of these constructions along the river will aggravate the situation and at thesame time make it difficult for the help to arrive to the place.
The potential negative impacts that the attributes of the site might have are among the mostsignificant the loss of lives, loss of architectural value because of the destruction of buildings. The
Social value will be affected, spaces that the site has as the churches, plazas, theatre will be loss.
Historical and educational values will be decreased, because of the loss of data and collections
from museums. Economical damage and decrease in tourism (Fig. 4).

64

2.5 Outline of a Disaster Risk Management Plan (DRM) of Historic Centre. Tegucigalpa, Honduras

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities

Fig. 4 Cultural Heritage Buildings in the Historic Centre of Tegucigalpa

Scenario
A Hurricane arrived to the country, wind storms starts all over the territory. Heavy rainfall during
three days in Tegucigalpa caused flash floods of Choluteca's river and tributaries. The swollen river
overflows its banks, tearing down the entire neighborhood and bridges around the historic district.
The rainfall also triggers massive landslides, close to the downtown area. Due to the landslides
debris flowed into the river, forming a dam. The dam clogged the waters of the river and many ofthe low-lying areas of the Historic District were submerged; historic buildings located along theriver were either completely destroyed or badly damaged. The massive landslide occurred during
midnight so the staff of the museums and heritage buildings were not able to save any art work,
document or sculpture.

4. Disaster Risk Mitigation Plan Draft
Due to the vulnerability of the city, the government developed a Disaster Risk Management Plan
that protects in first place people and in a second instance the infrastructure. No cultural heritage
protection is mentioned in this plan. That´s why the main goals for a construction of a DRM for
Cultural Heritage is to create social awareness in the community, building owners, central andlocal government of the need to protect the cultural heritage from a disaster, and to Involve cultural
heritage in the disaster risk management plan (sinager-copeco) existing in Honduras. Little steps
have been done by joining the program of Resilient Cities and introducing into the DRM plan the
Hyogo Framework.
Mitigation Strategies
The following chart shows the different strategies evaluated for the DRM draft for the historic centreof Tegucigalpa (Table 1).
Emergency Preparedness, Response and Recovery Plan
For the emergency preparedness, the most important issue is to have a team that would response
effectively in any case. For this instance Tegucigalpa has an emergency response institution thatworks successfully in cases of natural disasters, but they don´t work in the protection of cultural
Heritage. That is why besides the existing emergency response which is in this case external

65

Table 1

STRATEGICAL

LEVEL

WHEN

Introduce into the national
disaster risk management system
the protection of cultural heritage.

LONG
TERM

Creating social awareness of thehazard and threats the historic
district has.

SHORT
TERM

COMMUNITY, CULTURALCOMMITTES, LOCALGOVERNMENTMEDIUMCOST

SHORT

NATIONAL AND
INTERNATIONAL EXPERTS,
NATIONAL GOVERNMET(INFRASTRUCTURE
DEPARTMENT), LOCALGOVERNMENT

HIGH

SHORT

CONSERVATORS, IHAH,
GCH, ACADEMYMEDIUM

MEDIUMNATIONAL AND
INTERNATIONAL EXPERTS,
NATIONAL GOVERNMET(INFRASTRUCTURE
DEPARTMENT), LOCALGOVERNMENT

HIGH

Periodic maintenance of CH
buildings.

SHORT

BUILDING MANAGERS
AND OWNERS, LOCALGOVERNMET, MINISTRY OF
CULTURE, IHAHMEDIUM

Countermeasures for the river(cleaning, digging)

SHORT

LOCAL GOVERNMETMEDIUM
COST

Studies for the stabilizationof the berrinche hill to avoid
landslides (implementation of thetechniques)

TACTICAL

Assess the buildings stability incase of earthquake and flood.
Apply techniques for thestabilization of the ch buildings

OPERATIONAL

Review the national code for
drm to introduce in them theprotection for historic buildings.

66

MEDIUM

WHO

HOW
MUCH

MITIGATION MEASURE

LOCAL GOVERNMET,COPECO-CODEM, HISTORIC LOW COSTCENTRE OFFICEPOLITICIANS (CULTURALLOW COSTCOMMITTE IN PARLIAMENT)Special regulation for
construction on river banks.

SHORT

LOCAL GOVERNEMET,PLANIFICATION UNIT

LOW COSTDefine under the master plan forthe historic district a green area
along the river.

MEDIUM

LOCAL GOVERNEMENT,HISTORIC CENTRE OFFICELOW COSTSpecial regulations for electricalsystems.

SHORT

FIRE DEPARTMENT,LOCAL GOVERNMENTPALNIFICATION UNIT

LOW COST

Community planning involving
the people living in the informal
settlements as human resource
for the protection of the site.

SHORT/MEDIUM

COMMUNITY, LOCALGOVERNMENTMEDIUM
COST

2.5 Outline of a Disaster Risk Management Plan (DRM) of Historic Centre. Tegucigalpa, Honduras

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities(national level) to the site, the stakeholders in the local level involved must work and be part of theteam. The local stakeholders are Community Leader (patronatos), Heritage Buildings Managers,
CODEL (Community emergency response team), Head chief of Historic Central District Office,and the external team CODEM (Local Government emergency response team), COPECO (Central
Government emergency response team), Emergency response NGO´s, Fire Department and Police
Department (Fig. 5).
Since the most threatening and usual hazards (flooding, heavy rainfall) can be predicted theemergency response team should start at the national level, nevertheless the local team must informof any emergency that hasn´t been predicted (fire).
Since the Historic Centre has the Spanish colonial configuration it has many plazas that can work as
evacuation areas in case of fire or flash flooding (Fig. 6).
As for recovery activities they can be grouped on immediate, short, medium term and those thathave to be periodically revised. The first days are those for rescuing efforts, they involve specificallyon trying to save lives. After this a general overview of the Cultural Heritage must be done by
the direct stakeholders and assessment of damage of the buildings must be started. The firstassessment will define the emergency treatment that has to be taken for the damaged buildings, tolater on time after a defined recovery plan for the buildings and urban areas has been elaborated,start with the restoration works. The DRM plan for the site must be revised and modified dependingon the lessons learned on the past disasters (Fig. 7).

Fig. 5 Flowchart of Emergency Team67

Fig. 6 Proposed Evacuation Routes Map

Fig. 7 Proposed Recovery Plan

68

2.5 Outline of a Disaster Risk Management Plan (DRM) of Historic Centre. Tegucigalpa, Honduras

5. Conclusions
Protection of cultural Heritage and risk management are two separate institutions that must be
married for the formulation of a Disaster Risk Management of cultural Heritage in Tegucigalpa. The
lack of articulation of these institutions makes it difficult to protect the attributes and values this sitehave. Writing down the draft for a DRM makes it easier to know the path we must follow to formulate
the real DRM that will engage all the stakeholders involved in the protection of cultural heritage andthe disaster risk management.
References
1）Plan Arriba Capital 20122）Disaster, Risks and Developments in Honduras. PNUD 20123）National Plan for Integral Risk Management. COPECO/PNUD 20134）Inventory of Cultural Heritage in Tegucigalpa 2006

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Cities69

3 Formulating Disaster Risk Management
Plans of Heritage Sites

3.1 Cultural Heritage at Risk: Preparing a Disaster Risk Management Planfor the UNESCO World Heritage Property of Fatehpur Sikri, India
Jyoti PANDEY SHARMA
Professor in Architecture, Department of Architecture, Deenbandhu Chhotu Ram Universityof Science & Technology, India

1. Context
There is increasing unanimity among professionals and academics who engage with culturethat the contemporary recognition of cultural heritage must shift from its traditional position asa rather niche discipline to gaining acceptance as a mainstream determinant of the designand development of the contemporary built environment. Indeed, the 2010 UN Summit on theMillennium Development Goals strongly articulated the pivotal role played by culture towards therealization of sustainable development goals. If the global community aims to realize the notion ofsustainable development in entirety, it is imperative that the immunity of the cultural ecosystem, aThrosby-ian construct, be bolstered against potential risks just as the environmental ecosystem
has been shielded from potential risks that could undermine its existence. This entails that heritage
and the risks that threaten its wellbeing be allowed to occupy a more centre stage position for an
engaging dialogue between them as opposed to the conventional practice of regarding the two as
disparate disciplines, detached from one another.
Absence of an interface between culture and potential risks it faces and their management is an
issue that persists across nations in varying degrees of complexity. In the Indian context, on the
one hand, there is little awareness of culture’s value as an asset to be safeguarded for posterity,
on the other, there is not only lack of awareness about the management of risk to culture, butalso lack of representation of culture in disaster management initiatives in general. This scenario
poses a threat to the vast corpus of cultural heritage in India thereby underscoring the need for
examining culture from a risk lens. In an attempt to bridge the gap between heritage and risk, thisPaper proposes a Disaster Risk Management Plan (henceforth DRM Plan) for the UNESCO World
Heritage Site of Fatehpur Sikri in India. The DRM Plan is being made for the religious and spiritual
precinct of Fatehpur Sikri and aims to demonstrate that management of risk enhances the value ofthe cultural resource and safeguards it for posterity.
2. Fatehpur Sikri: Overview
Fatehpur Sikri, located in Agra District of the state of Uttar Pradesh in north India, is a 16th century
city built by one of the most illustrious rulers of the Mughal Dynasty, Badshah (Emperor) Akbar(1556-1605). Envisaged as a Badshahi Shahar (imperial capital), the city’s longevity as a Mughal
capital was rather short, only about a decade, in comparison to other Mughal capitals, Agra,
Delhi and Lahore. Its patron’s reverence for the highly venerated Sufi saint, Sheikh Salim Chishti,
who resided at the site, and whose blessing resulted in the birth of an heir to the Mughal throne,caused Badshah Akbar to raise a capital city in 1571 under his own supervision (Fig.1). As acapital city, Fatehpur Sikri, was equipped with all the necessary spatial configurations required forthe functioning of a grand Mughal court with the imperial complex occupying the most prominentsite on the top of a rocky sandstone ridge and overlooking an artificial lake, all contained within
a walled enclosure with a number of gates. The imperial complex broadly comprised a spatial
ensemble with spaces for governance and residence and a religious and spiritual precinct, thelatter centered on the Jami Masjid (Friday mosque) and the Dargah (place of interment) of Sheikh
Salim Chishti. Dispensed around it were the residences of the city’s nobles and other residents.
The city was a tangible embodiment of Badshah Akbar’s egalitarian views with built forms arranged
around a series of open courts, terraces and gardens, exhibiting architectural influences culledfrom all parts of the Mughal domain, whose diversity was underpinned by homogeneity induced723.1 Cultural Heritage at Risk: Preparing a Disaster Risk Management Planfor the UNESCO World Heritage Property of Fatehpur Sikri, India

by the building material, red sandstone that was locally quarried (Fig.2). Even as the walled city
did not last as a Mughal capital for more than a decade, Fatehpur Sikri was comparable to other
Mughal capitals in terms of architectural grandness that underscored most Mughal building
ventures.

Fig. 1 Fatehpur Sikri: Overview of the capital city Courtesy: Author

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

Fig. 2 Fatehpur Sikri: Imperial Palace complex Courtesy: Author

3. Fatehpur Sikri: UNESCO World Heritage Site
Fatehpur Sikri was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1986 under its operationalguidelines via Criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv). The imperial complex, with both the religious andsecular precincts, forms the core of the heritage site and has 93 monuments that are protected
by Government of India’s nodal official organization for conservation of cultural heritage,
Archaeological Survey of India (henceforth ASI). Even as ASI is the official custodian of the site
and is responsible for its conservation, the religious and spiritual precinct is under the care of theWaqf Board. The site lies in the Taj Trapezium Zone, an area of 10,400 Sq. Km. that bans polluting
industries. Further, the site has a well defined core area where construction is prohibited up to
100.0 M. radius from the protected limit and a buffer area where construction is regulated up to
200.0 M. radius from the prohibited limit (Fig.3). Furthermore, an extension of the buffer area isplanned under the Fatehpur Sikri Master Plan. Fatehpur Sikri is a very popular tourist site receivinga large number of visitors, both domestic and foreign, with the numbers for the year 2012-13
being 499,074 and 219,882 respectively as per ASI’s ticket collection records. Currently, no sitemanagement plan has been prepared for the site, although the process is underway. Likewise no
DRM Plan for the site currently exists.

73

Fig. 3 Fatehpur Sikri: Delineationof UNESCO World Heritage
Site’s core and buffer area
Courtesy: Archaeological Survey ofIndia, Agra Circle, Agra,
Uttar Pradesh, India

4. Religious and Spiritual Precinct: Overview
Visitors to the site includes a large number of pilgrims who visit the Dargah of Sheikh Salim Chishti to
pay obeisance and to seek fulfillment of their wish besides offering prayer in the Jami Masjid, among
the largest in the Indian Subcontinent (Fig.4). A Madrasa (Islamic theological school) continues to
run from the mosque precinct keeping the centuries old tradition of Islamic theological learning alive.
In contrast to the secular part of the complex, the religious and spiritual precinct is a living one withthe descendants of the Saint’s family continuing to live in close proximity to the Dargah. Furthermore,
a settlement whose year of origin may be difficult to establish with absolute certainty, also nestles
at the foot of the ridge adding to the site’s multi textured grain (Fig.5). The principal stakeholders
engaging with the site are also diverse ranging from government bodies - Archaeological Surveyof India, Nagar Palika Parishad (Urban Local Body), Town and Country Planning Office and Agra
Development Authority to public agencies like the Waqf Board, besides the resident community,
tourists and pilgrims. Further, being a UNESCO World Heritage site, international agencies notably
UNESCO and ICCROM are also partners in ensuring its conservation.

Fig. 4 Fatehpur Sikri: Religious and spiritual precinct Courtesy: Author74

3.1 Cultural Heritage at Risk: Preparing a Disaster Risk Management Planfor the UNESCO World Heritage Property of Fatehpur Sikri, India

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

Fig. 5 Fatehpur Sikri: Settlement around the religious and spiritual precinct Courtesy: Author

5. Precinct Attributes and Values
That Fatehpur Sikri has been inscribed as a World Heritage Site under Criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv) isa testimony of its high attributes and values. The religious and spiritual precinct comprises the
Jami Masjid (Friday mosque) and the Dargah (place of interment) of Sheikh Salim Chishti, the latterstanding within the large forecourt of the mosque. Entry into the precinct is via three gateways ofwhich the Buland Darwaza, the loftiest, was built as a commemorative structure to celebrate imperial
victory in war (Fig.6). The built form of the precinct has immovable and tangible attributes withvalues including architectural, artistic and technological that are of high quality. It also has intangible
attributes by way of religious, spiritual, social and cultural values as the precinct sustains rituals,
belief systems and religious practices that have continued unabated since the 16th century (Fig.7).
The large courtyard of the mosque also acts as a space for community interaction. Further, the site
also supports the local economy by catering to religious tourism.

Fig. 6 Fatehpur Sikri: Buland Darwaza opening into the Jami Mosque Courtyard Courtesy: Author

75

Fig. 7 Fatehpur Sikri: Shrine of Shaikh Salim Chishti Courtesy: Author

6. Precinct Risk Assessment
The management of risk constitutes a vital part of the overall site management framework for ahistoric site including UNESCO World Heritage Sites like Fatehpur Sikri. Indeed, the absence ofrisk assessment for a site increases its vulnerability to hazards both natural and manmade that
could be of low, moderate to high impact. In case of Fatehpur Sikri, a scrutiny of the site’s history
that was recorded by the ASI in its colonial avatar since the late 19th century and continues to berecorded by ASI in its post independence avatar reveals that the site did not experience any majordisaster, natural or manmade. This by no means implies that the site is not vulnerable to threats.
An analysis of the various religious and social activities carried out in the religious and spiritual
precinct supports the conclusion that fire and terrorism can be identified as the primary potential
hazards impacting the precinct. Even as there is absence of any record of past fires in the precinct,
there is certainly a risk of fire, particularly in the Dargah owing observance of rituals that include
lamp lighting and incense burning. Further, the presence of inflammable material notably scaredthreads tied by pilgrims by way of wish fulfillment on the marble screens and offering of Chadars(scared cloth coverings) increases the vulnerability to fire. Likewise, the site has had no past eventof terrorism, however an increase in the number of terrorist events in the past in India notably in
religious and cultural sites makes the precinct vulnerable.
In the unfortunate eventuality of a fire or act of terrorism occurring on the site, it is projected thatthe precinct vulnerability will be accelerated by one or combination of the following conditions inflammable nature of Dargah furnishings and ritualistic offerings, low quality/faulty electricalwiring, single entry-egress to Dargah, difficult vehicular access, scarcity of staff, lack of training indealing with the hazard, absence of/dysfunctional fire fighting equipment, low awareness among
local community, pilgrims and tourists, absence of a site emergency evacuation plan and lack ofavaliability of life saving medical emergency measures, among others. Needless to say, the events
will result in loss of intangible cultural values and social fabric rupture. On a tangible level, the loss
will entail loss of life, injury, loss of livelihood and burning of homes and businesses. Furthermore,
there will be loss of architectural, historic and artistic value via burning of soft furnishing andofferings, blackening of marble, breakage of building components - marble screens and columns,
falling stone roof projections, splintering of stone, loss of carving and collapse of domes among
others.
At the same time there are also slow impact risks affecting the site. These are centered on
the human condition - high population density, low economic profile of residents, extreme
overcrowding, poor infrastructure and depreciating building stock, on the one hand, and on
human behavior - apathy, neglect and vandalism, on the other. The precinct is also vulnerable to76

3.1 Cultural Heritage at Risk: Preparing a Disaster Risk Management Planfor the UNESCO World Heritage Property of Fatehpur Sikri, India

natural phenomenon like dust storms, pests, pollution, vegetation and weathering. These factors
collectively pose a threat to the cultural attributes that the precinct embodies.
The vulnerability to risk is compounded by the fact that the coping capacity of the site stakeholders
is poor with low levels of disaster awareness at all stages of its occurrence – preparedness,
response and mitigation as well as recovery. The concomitant response by the stakeholders
towards an eventuality is not only likely to be lacking in efficacy, but will also be underpinned by astrong fatalistic attitude. It is worthwhile to underscore that all risks identified above will impact thesite in its entirety including its social and cultural fibre and not simply the built fabric.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

7. Proposed DRM Plan for Fatehpur Sikri: Vision and Mission
The formulation of a DRM Plan for Fatehpur Sikri will be a vital intervention that will draw attention
to disaster risk reduction through assessment of potential risks besides delineating the approachand methodology for dealing with risks through measures that will meaningfully engage all
stakeholders, notably the residents, the state, visitors, social workers and professionals, to respondeffectively at all levels. The Plan will also aim at enhancing the precinct’s coping capacity by
establishing a framework that draws in equal measure on conventional practices as well as on thereality of the site’s regional and local context.
8. Risk Mitigation Measures
Various mitigation measures ranging from long to mid to short term envisaged for the precinct are
as under:Strategic Level Measures (Long Term)① Regular monitoring of the legal provisions laid down for the Taj Trapezium Zone that banspolluting industries.
② Implementation of ASI’s Nation Conservation Policy Article (15) that has provision for disasterrisk management.
③ National Building Code has provision for fire safety but no provision with regard to cultural
heritage. It is recommended that provision be made for inclusion of cultural heritage in theCode.
④ Making provision for cultural heritage in the National Disaster Management Framework.
⑤ P roviding tax incentives for putting in place DRM Plans for cultural properties bystakeholders.
Planning Level Measures (Mid to Long Term)① Local area building byelaws have provision for fire safety but no separate provision for cultural
heritage. It is recommended that building byelaws for all new development include a clausethat deals with cultural heritage that encompasses the site and its larger setting.
② Establishing Standard Operating Protocol for disaster risk management of cultural assets.
③ Making a Site Management Plan for the site.
④ Undertaking risk assessment mapping for the site.
⑤ Undertaking a cultural attribute and value assessment for the site by recording, mappingand digitizing all aspects of the cultural heritage.
⑥ Inventorizing the material objects in the Dargah and Mosque - lamps; ebony canopy over theSaint’s grave; Chadar (fabric coverings).
⑦ Ensuring that a back up for all the assessments and inventories is made and kept in a safe
place.
Technical Level Measures (Mid to Short Term)① Conducting training programme for the watch and ward staff on disaster risk reduction.
② Regularly monitoring Dargah activities by the Waqf Board watch and ward staff.

77

③ Undertaking periodic maintenance and monitoring of the wiring system in the precinct.
④ Carrying out regular maintenance of the various traditional water systems of the site to checkblockages.
⑤ Bolstering staff strength.
⑥ Improving security of the site.
Community Level Measures (Mid to Short Term)① Engaging with the religious / spiritual heads of the site to underscore their role as leaders of
the community particularly in times of emergency..
② Building awareness among the local community, pilgrims and tourists about the cultural valueof the site and the risk of disaster.
③ Undertaking risk mapping by the community on the site and the environs to foster a stronger
sense of heritage ownership and its stewardship.
④ Encouraging the community to take up voluntary watch and ward in the area.
9. Emergency Preparedness and Response
The emergency preparedness response draws on the fact that the site is relatively isolated with thenearest urban centre, Agra being 37 Km. away. This reality becomes a determinant of the responsein that it relies largely on self help by way of an immediate response by the local community.
This entails the creation of an on site stakeholders emergency response team with roles clearlydelineated in consultation with local police and political representatives and are based on costeffective, do-able measures.
Some proposed measures are as under:① Round the clock monitoring by hired watch and ward staff.
② Carrying out annual electrical audit of all electrical installations in the precinct.
③ Manning the Dargah’s single entry cum egress to keep it clear of devotees and objects at all
times.
④ Using the mosque’s public address system to sound alert.
⑤ Alerting the on site emergency response team via a mobile application.
⑥ Displaying and marking evacuation routes and refuge areas via a map at the all entry points
to the precinct. Further, marking evacuation routes and refuge areas on the entry ticket to restof the site.
⑦ Training response team members notably site tour guides, to guide public – pilgrims andvisitors to safety.
⑧ Engaging with religious / spiritual leaders to seek consent for relying on the traditional water
sources namely mosque ablution pool, wells and tanks to fight fire as part of emergency
response.
⑨ Installing firefighting equipment including battery operated smoke detector & alarm, fire
extinguishers, water hose and pump system that use water from the traditional water systems.
⑩ Preparing guidelines for standard operating procedures for disaster outbreak at national,
state, inter-state and civic levels of governance.
⑪ Devising management protocols for media and politicians.
⑫ Designating parking area for fire engine and ambulance in the site parking lot.
⑬ Creating obstacle free routes to evacuation areas.
⑭ Organising regular fire drills.
⑮ L inking important festivals like the Saint’s birth and death anniversaries to events likeobservance of Fire Safety Day.
⑯ Maintaining all traditional water systems on site.
⑰ Setting up CCTV cameras in ticketing area for effective surveillance.
⑱ Setting up an on site control room for disaster management.

78

3.1 Cultural Heritage at Risk: Preparing a Disaster Risk Management Planfor the UNESCO World Heritage Property of Fatehpur Sikri, India

10. Recovery Plan
The recovery plan for the precinct involves all site stakeholders and is to be carried out in threephases namely short, medium and long term as indicated in the Table.
Agencies

Short Term

1. Central Government 1. Evacuation.
2. Relief distribution.
(Ministry of Culture)
2. Central Agencies and 3. Removing debris.
4. Propping up /Institutions
securing structures(ASI, NMA, NIA, CBI
that can pose a risk.
etc.)
5. Cordoning off thesite.

Long Term

1. Initiating conservation 1. Implementing
conservation works.
work.
2. Reopening of site to 2. Formulating heritagebye-laws for buffer
public.
area.
3. Making a Site
Management Plan.
4. Making a Disaster
Management Plan.
5. Increasing
surveillance andinformation sharing.

1. Equipping the
1. Providing interest
1. Undertaking relief
primary healthfree loans to reinitiate
work.
centre to handle
local businesses.
2. Removing the injured
emergencies.
2. Providing subsidy toto nearby hospitals.
affected people in the 2. Establishing a Block
3. Running relief camps
level fire office.
core and buffer area
for the displaced.
3. Maintaining
to rebuild homes.
4. Restoring public
infrastructure.
3. Upgrading andservices.
4. Undertaking capacity
maintaining
5. Securing publicbuilding throughinfrastructure likeinfrastructure.
awareness drives.
water supply and6. Removing debris.
5. Hiring moreinstallation of fire
personnel.
safety measures.
6. Conducting regularfire drills.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

1. State Government
2. Municipal Authority
3. Development
Authority
4. Paramilitary forces
5. Police
6. Fire Department
7. Community
8. NGOs / Volunteer
groupsMedium Term

11. Conclusion
The DRM Plan for Fatehpur Sikri demonstrates that the conventional approach of regarding
culture and risks as two disconnected entities has to be replaced by a new way of thinking where
heritage needs to be examined from a risk perspective. This approach is warranted not only for thecountry’s UNESCO World Heritage properties like Fatehpur Sikri but also for other sites. Given thevast corpus of heritage that exists in India, a policy of prioritization can be adopted where DRM
Plans can be made beginning with the UNESCO World Heritage properties followed by plans forsites of national, regional and local significance. Safeguarding culture against potential risks is oneof the vital measures to ensure that the country is treading on the path of sustainable developmentin keeping with the global development paradigm.
References
1）Archaeological Survey of India: Fatehpur Sikri, New Delhi, Good Earth Publications, 2002
2）Brand, Michael and Lowry, Glenn D., eds.: Fatehpur-Sikri, Bombay, Marg, 19873）Jigyasu, Rohit and Arora, Vanicka: Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage in Urban
Area: A Training Guide, Kyoto, Research Centre for Disaster Mitigation of Urban Cultural
heritage, Ritsumeikan University, 2013
4）Throsby, David: ‘Culture, economics, and sustainability’, Journal of Cultural Economics, 19: 199206, 1995

79

3.2 Disaster Risk Management of Al-Hadba’a Minaret’s site
Alaa N. HAMDON
University Lecturer, Researcher and Earthquake Expert,
Remote Sensing Center, Mosul University, Iraq

1. Introduction
Iraq is the cradle of one of the ancient civilizations in the humanity age and many civilizations
came along the time one by one, till the last empire of Abbasy. Also, Iraq considers as one of thegood places of the world to have many cultural heritages, according to the geographical site andthe environmental factors of it.
Through the time, each civilization made a ground signature by set up a monument refers to thatcivilization and later these monuments survived against the human and environment effects by thetime to be a very important cultural heritage (Watt & et. al.,2009).
Our case study considers as one of the important monuments in Iraq and is located north parts of
Iraq in the middle of Mosul city at latitude (36 ˚ 20′36″N) and longitude (43 ˚ 07′37″E) (Fig.1).
The old heritage of Al-hadba’a Minaret in Mosul is a famous monument for its considerable
height and leaning even after approximately 800 years since its construction still withstanding
degradation. Such as Pizza tower which been built in the same period (Fig.2).

Fig. 1 Location of the study area

Fig. 2 Pizza tower and Hadba’a minaret images

80

3.2 Disaster Risk Management of Al-Hadba’a Minaret’s site

2. Attributes of Al-Hadba'a sites
Al-Hadba'a minaret is important to the study of human history because it could provide a concrete
basis for ideas, and can validate it. It's preservation demonstrates the recognition of the necessityof the past and of the things that tell its story. Preserved monuments also validate memories; andthe actuality of the object, as opposed to a reproduction or surrogate, draws people in and gives
them a literal way of touching the past. This unfortunately poses a danger as places and things
are damaged by the Natural hazards, hands of tourists and other risks of making an object known
and available.
The study area has many values and attributes, and the most important value for the whole site
generally is the historical value because the site been built since 800 years and the minaret of thesite still stand. The symbolism value comes after the first one because the local community has
spiritual connection with the minaret and consider it as one of the most important symbol of Mosulcity and whole Iraq. Therefore, we are going to display some of this site attributes to show thevaluable factor for this monument (Table 1).
Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

Table 1 The attributes of Al-Hadba'a Site

3. The vulnerability of the site
In this cultural heritage site there are some vulnerability which could affect directly or indirectly on
the stability of the minaret and the vicinity area. The most important and more affection vulnerability
factor here is the cavity, which exist underneath the whole site and especially underneath theminaret. The cavity been made in the basement rocks under the soil cover, and these rocks
consist mainly of Gypsum rock, which is highly dissolved by the water and any acidic liquid. As
known that Mosul city settled over a considerable prevalence of a Gypsum rocks in the whole area
(Buday,1980) (Fig. 3).
Through the time these rocks been dissolved by the underground water , whether is natural wateror came from waste water through leakage in the waste pipe system. Those sources considers
the main sources to produces the cavity and its extension and also those sources affecting on theminaret shape by leaning the structure of the minaret toward the east (Abed & Ghassan, 2013)(Fig.4).
The second vulnerability factor of the risk in the site is the existed cracks in the minaret's basestructure. These cracks have high risky value for being more developed in the future and then thatwill lead into structure failure and collapsing of the minaret (Taib & et. al., 2010) (Fig.5).

81

The third vulnerability factor in study area is the continues failure in the sewage system in thearea, which is always has leakage of the sewage water and then that would help in dissolving the
bedrocks (Gypsum), and then enlarging the cavity.

the
site
locationFig. 3 Geological map of the study area and the vicinity area

Fig. 4 Shows the cavity underneath the minaret and leaning of the minaret shape (ref. 3 & 4)82

3.2 Disaster Risk Management of Al-Hadba’a Minaret’s site

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

Fig. 5 The cracks in the base and the body of the minaret

4. Population
The study area has a high amount of people settled around the monument site from all directionsand very close to the site. The high population around the site rises the risk rate of the humancausality in case any disaster would happen in the study area. So, the disaster risk management
wouldn't just protect the monument from collapsing, but also to save the human lives in thesurrounded area (Fig.6).

Fig. 6 Population in the study area83

5. Disaster risk management plan
As a result from this study, a disaster risk management plan has been made and concluded to
manage the site-in to be aware from any risk of disaster could happen in the site and to preserve
the monument (the minaret) from collapsing, also, to protect the residential area from that risk as
well.
Plan will have effective procedures that promote the way of preserving the monument fromcollapsing and protect the people from any threats of the collapsing by natural and human-madedisasters at future (Fig.7).

Fig. 7 Disaster risk management plan for the study area

The procedures in the plan will contains of:① Make an underground scanning to the CH site to determine the cavity and its size and extension
by modern technology such as GPR.
② Grouting those cavities by appropriates materials to prevent the collapsing of the cavities withrespect to the gases pressure inside these cavities.
③ Fixing the cracks in the minaret's body by advanced utilities to prevent the failure in the cracks,
which would lead into body failure.
④ Constructing a buffer zone around the site with width around 200 meters, and planting a tree
and green grass in that buffer zone to make it as a leisure area for the local community.
⑤ Set a virtual evacuation area near to the site to evacuate the people in case any disaster would
happen, and in the study area we determined two area because it is car parking area and it
would be good option to be as evacuation area and easy to reach to.
⑥ Set a virtual area for collecting the CH parts in case of the disaster to prevent any robbery of
the precious parts of the monument through the disaster, and this area would be with big spacesurrounded by building to be guarded well.
⑦ Action plan has been proposed in this site to mitigate and assess any risk would happen in thissite and also post-disaster (Fig.8).

84

3.2 Disaster Risk Management of Al-Hadba’a Minaret’s site

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

Fig. 8 Proposed action plan of the study area

References
1）Watt J, Tidblad J, Kucera V & Hamilton R: The Effects of Air Pollution on Cultural Heritage,
Springer Science-Business Media, LLC, 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013, USA., p.297,
20092）Buday T: The regional geology of Iraq (Stratigraphy paleontology) Dar AL-Kutib publishing
House ,Mosul, Iraq, p.443, , 1980
3）Taib M, Khatab S I & Khalil A A: Stability of Al-Hadba minaret a-parametric study, Eng. & Tech.
Journal, Mosul University, Iraq, 28(19): 14, 20104）Abed R S & Ghassan N A: Measurements in Al-hadbaa Minaret Using Robotic Total Station,
Eng. & Tech. Journal, Mosul University, Iraq, 31, Part (A), No.5: 910-920, 201385

3.3 Lahore Fort
Zafar SHAH
Regional Emergency Officer, Punjab Emergency Service (Rescue 1122),
Chowk Kumharanwala, Multan, Punjab, Pakistan

1. Introduction (Fig. 1)
This article comprises of the context reproduced in the light of International Training Courseof Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage under UNESCO Chair Program held from
06-22-Septumber, 2014 at R-DMUCH, Kyoto, Japan. History with back ground knowledge of thefort, attributes, hazards, risks and vulnerabilities, mitigation strategies for fire, stages of agent
control for fire and flood and recovery plan are briefly described in this article. It is strongly
recommended to furnish DRM Plan and implement it accordingly through coordination of all
stakeholders and line agencies.

Fig. 1 Inscribed on World Heritage List (N171) in 1981 based on criteria I, II and III Lahore Fort Cooedinates: Loftgitude: 74, 3097E,
Latitude=39. 5903N

2. History
Lahore Fort is located at an eminence in the northwest corner of the Walled City of Lahore, Punjab,
Pakistan. The citadel covers about 50 acres and is trapezoidal in form. The origin of this fort goesback to Mythical as its foundation is attributed to Prince Lob, son of Rama with its 1st historicreference date from before the 11th century. The present fortifications were begun by Mughal
Emperor Jalaluddin Muhammad Akbar. There is evidence that a mud fort was existed here in 1021,
when Mahmud of Ghazni invaded this area. Akbar demolished the old mud fort and constructedmost of the modern fort on the old foundations. The fort's mud construction dates back to the early
Hindu period. The fort is mentioned in connection with Muhammad Sam's invasions of Lahore in
1180, 1184, and 1186. It was ruined by the Mongols in 1241, and then rebuilt by Balban in 1267. It
was again destroyed by Amir Taimur's army in 1398, to be rebuilt in mud by Sultan Mubarak Shahin 1421, then taken and repaired by Shaikh Ali. The present fort, in brick and solid masonry, wasbuilt during Akbar's reign between 1556 and 1605. Every successor Mughal emperor, as well as
the Sikhs and the British, added a pavilion, palace, or wall to the Lahore Fort, making it the only
monument in Pakistan which represents a complete history of Mughal architecture.
There are two huge gates in the fortifications, one each in the middle of the east and the west
sides. The western gate, known as Alamgiri Gate, is presently used as the main entrance. The
86

3.3 Lahore Fort

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

Masjidi Gate, Eastern Gate, built in 1666 during Akbar's reign, was the original entrance to the fort
and faces the historic Maryam Zamani Mosque.
Alamgiri Gate, a magnificent double-storey gate, was built by Emperor Mohiuddin Aurangzeb
Alamgir in 1673 and faces the grand Badshahi Mosque and opens into Hazuri Bagh. The
fortification wall is built of small burnt bricks strengthened with semicircular bastions at regularintervals. The mural wall turns the corner and continues as the north fortification wall, withseveral pavilions situated on the top and overlooking the north aspect?this is the area whereonce the waters of the Ravi washed the foundations of the fortification wall. No specific Disaster
Management / Fire Fighting System exist for the Lahore Fort. In 1955, Flood damaged the fort. In
1988 Flood protection bunds saved the city and fort from flood damage. Interestingly, the samearchitect, Abdul Karim Mamur Khan, was employed by Jahangir and during the early part of Shah
Jahan's reign.
The citadel is divided into different sections, each creating its own world within its quadrangle. The
three great Mughal emperors namely Akbar, Jahangir and Shah Jahan are remembered for theirgreat architectural work in this regard. The fourth, Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir, constructed theimpressive Badshahi Mosque and, like the other three, left an indelible architectural mark on thecultural map of Lahore.
The following are worth mentioning while describing Lahore Fort:① Alamgiri Gate
② Gateway Ramparts.
③ Dewan-E-Khas.
④ Dewan-E-Aam⑤ Daulat Khana-E-Khas-O-Aam⑥ Sheesh Mahal⑦ Naulakha Pavilion⑧ Hathipar (Elephant Path)⑨ Moti Masjid⑩ Hazuri Bagh
⑪ Jahangir’s Quadrangle⑫ khavabgah- e-shah jahan (sleeping chamber)⑬ PaienBagh (Ladies Garden)⑭ AthDarra (Building having eight openings)⑮ Shah Burj Gate
⑯ Makatib Khana⑰ Haveli of Kharak Singh⑱ Zenana Hammam⑲ Paien Bagh and Khilwat Khana (Chamber of Seclusion) Quadrangle⑳ Lal and Kala Burj (Scarlet and Black Towers)
 Shah Burj or Royal Tower
 Reception Court Ranjit Singh's Athdarra
Dewan-e-Aam (Garden of Public Audience) located in the south of the citadel, is the earliest andthe most important element of Mughal court ceremonial spaces. Its generous dimensions of
730'x460' providing an arena of enormous scale once framed by a perimeter of cloisters, it allowed
the pageantry of the Mughal court to be enacted with extraordinary splendor. Much damage wascaused during the Sikh occupancy and Inter-Sikh wars, and after annexation many cloisters weredemolished to construct European artillery and infantry barracks when the Mughal fort served as a
British cantonment.
Diwan-e-Khass is the marble pavilion of exquisite beauty, when the Ravi flowed along the north87fortification wall, the cusped arched openings on the north, carrying marble geometric framework
screens incorporating viewing windows would have provided a delightful prospect.
Dewan-E-Khas " Hall of Private Audience" was Built by Wazir Khan, the then Governor of Lahore in
1645 AD, measuring 53 Feet By 51 Feet, The entire Construction is in Chaste White Marble. This
is where the emperor listened to petitions of VIP's and after processing were stamped by the royalseal. During British period it was converted into a chappel. Floor is laid in marble intarsia of different
colors in geometrical pattern and a fine cup shaped. It is decorated with Petra Dura work.
Daulat Khana-e-Khass-o-Aam is accessed by following the steps to takht-jharoka. It is a building
cleverly placed to provide transition from the highly public area of the Diwan-e-Aam to the private
residential apartments of the imperial harem.
Makatib Khana is located in the northwest corner of the Maidan Diwan-e-Aam. It was designed by
one of the most accomplished Mughal architects-Abdul Karim titled Mamur Khan. This structure isconjectured to be part of a group of royal mansions on which the princely sum of seven lakhs Rupees
was expended, and which were much acclaimed by Emperor Jahangir in his delightful memoirs.
Haveli of Mai Jindan dominates the eastern periphery of the Moti Mosque Quadrangle. Mai Jindan,(Chandan or Chand Kaur), was the mother of the infant Sikh ruler, Dulip Singh. This two-storey
building may have originally been a Mughal structure, however, it is considered a Sikh structure due
to large-scale additions by the Sikhs.
Jahangir's Quadrangle was begun by Akbar and completed by Jahangir in 1618 and contains someof the earliest Mughal structures in the fort. The river Ravi once flowed at the foot of the northfortification.
Haveli of Kharak Singh, the heir to Ranjit Singh, occupies the southeast corner of Jahangir's
Quadrangle.
Hammam occupies the southwest corner. A Sikh-period map identifies it as a bath (hammam). It
is likely that this is the hammam that was built for the use of the imperial female entourage of theemperor.
Paien Bagh and Khilwat Khana (Chamber of Seclusion) Quadrangle are in continuation with eachother. Most of the structures are now lost, except the two major towers.
Khilwat Khana, a small bangladar pavilion of uncertain origin, lies in the centre of the northern edgeof the Paien Bagh. This building, marked as the 'Hall of Perfumes' on Sikh Period maps, is usuallyreferred to as the Khassa Khana.
Lal and Kala Burj (Scarlet and Black Towers), constructed by the Sikhs, are massive 4-storey
structures and are thought to have been used as residential apartments.
Shah Burj or Royal Tower is the most well documented group of buildings in the Fort.
Reception Court occupies the first part of the group of buildings of Shah Burj.
Ranjit Singh's Athdara is located on the western periphery of the reception court, beyond which issituated the Shah Burj.
Shish Mahal was the palace where after the annexation of the Punjab by the British, the sovereigntyof the Punjab, along with the fabulous Kohinoor diamond, was passed into the hands of the British.
Its white marble arcade composed of sculpted shash-hilali (6-crescent) arches, and the cusped
profile of engrailed spandrels is outlined with a delicate line of incised marble inlay.
Naulakha Pavilion is the only other structure that can claim to rival the celebrated Shish Mahal.
Naulakha is probably a Sikh appellation. This structure is placed at the central axis of the hauz(water reservoir) and is notable for its drooping bangladar roof, and distinctive pietra dura.
3. Attributes of Lahore Fort Associated Values and Stakeholders: Outstanding Universal Value
Lahore Fort and Shalamar Gardens Nominations were proposed for World Heritage List underCriteria1, 2 & 3 (Table 1).
①Represent a masterpiece of human creative genius②Exhibits an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural areaof world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts town planning or88

3.3 Lahore Fortlandscape design.
③Bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which isliving or which has disappeared
Table 1

Type of attribute

S. No.

1

3

Alamgiri Gate (Main Gate) • Immovable• Tangible
The main gate of the fort • Cultural
facing towards the Royal
Mosque.

Scores foreach Value
Associated Values

1(low),
2(Medium),3(High)• Architectural andAesthetic(As of Mughal
Era)• Historical(Mythicalorigin, destroyed
and rebuilt,
present shapein the reignof Aurangzeb
Alamgir)• Social(meeting
Place for people)• Technological(speaks volumesof architecturalera of Mughals)• Cultural(The main
recognition of the
fort)

3

3

Stakeholders
for these
valuesArcheology
Department,&
community
in shape ofvisitors andvendors

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

2

Attributes of Lahore Fort
Site and their location(movable/
immovable,
tangible/intangible,
natural/cultural/
mixed)

1
2

3

Dewan-e-Khas. The
Diwan-i-Khas is squarein plan with five bays of
lobed arches on threesides. The north facade
includes delicate jali
screens that overlook thenorthern ramparts of thefort. A shallow fountainsits at the center of thepavilion• Immovable• Tangible• Cultural• Architectural &Aesthetic(As hallmark of the forte)• Historical(Ashistory can betraced back since
the Mughal Era)
Arhitectural /Technological /Aesthetic3

Dewan-i-Aam: During
the first year of his reign,i.e. in 1628, the emperor
Shah Jahan ordered
the construction of the
Diwan-i-Am. It was built
in the shape of a hall of
forty lofty pillars of red
sandstone. Standing
on a large rectangularplatform, the hallmeasures 187 feet by 60
feet and rises to a heightof 34 feet.

• Immovable• Tangible• Cultural• Architectural &Aesthetic (As hallmark of the forte)• Historical(Ashistory can betraced back since
the Mughal Era)
• Arhitectural/
Technological/
Aesthetic• Social(visitors)• Economical(little
income)333Archeology
Department,
Visitors

Archeology
Department,
Visitors

2
1
1

89

4

5

Shish Mahal: The Sheesh
Mahal (The Palace of
Mirrors; is located within
the Shah Burj block innorthern-western cornerof Lahore Fort. It wasconstructed under thereign of Mughal Emperor
Shah Jahan in 1631-32.
The ornate white marble
pavilion is inlaid withpietra dura and complex
mirror-work of the finest
quality. The hall was
reserved for personal use
by the imperial family andclose aides. It is amongthe 21 monuments thatwere built by successive
Mughal emperors
inside Lahore Fort, andforms the jewel in theFort’s crown.As part ofthe larger Lahore Fort
Complex, it has been
inscribed as a UNESCOWorld Heritage Site since
1981.
Museum:the Armourey
Museum, also known as
the Fort Museum. It issaid that the architectureof the museum is worth
the trip alone, with its
classic Mughal era
workmanship.

• Immovable• Tnagible• Cultural• Immovable• Tangible• Cultural• Architectural&
Aesthetic(As hall mark of
the forte)• Historical(Ashistory can betraced backsince the Mughal
Era)• Arhitectural/
Technological/
Aesthetic• Social(visitors• Economical(little
income)3• Architectural &Aesthetic (As hallmark of the forte)• Historical(Ashistory can betraced back since
the Mughal Era)
• Social(visitors)• Economical(little
income)3

Catastrophic and Slow Hazards Likely to Affect the Fort
Hydro Metrological Hazards
・Climate Change・Thunder storm and Tornadoes
・Drought・Extreme cold / Heat
GEOPHYSICAL HAZARDS・Mass Movements
・Conflict・Terrorism
・IDP’s・Soil Erosion and Contamination
・Political Pressure・Economical Pressure

90

Departmentof Archeology
and visitors

3

3
2
1

3

3
3

Archeology
Department
and Visitors

3.3 Lahore Fort

Biological / Ecological Hazards
・Plant disease・Parts
・Erosion (of Biodiversity)
Astronomical Hazard
・Hazards From Space
Most Common Hazards
・Floods・Fire・Earthquake
・Lightening・Landslide・Stampede
Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

4. Risks and Vulnerabilities (Fig. 2)

Fig. 2 IRisks and Vulnerabilities

915. Mitigation Strategies for Fire (Table 2)
Table 2 Mitigation Strategies for Fire

S. No.

COMPONENT

FIRE

FLOOD

1

Strategic Level

Implementation on fire
safety act 2007

Incorporate the protection of forte in floodplan of the district.

2

OperationalLevel

Diversion of trafficaround the forte,setup
fire unit in the forte

Already built protection bund need repair
at some points

3

Environmental
Strategies

Plantationof trees,
awareness seminars

Plantationof trees, awareness seminars

4

TechnicalLevel

Firefighting

Raisingofthelowlyingareanearwestandeast
gates,repairoferodedboundarywalls,reinfor
cementofthewalls.

5

Material

Fire Resistant material,
fire proofing, non
inflammables

waterresistantcoatingoncollectionsofMus
eums.

6

Maintenance andMonitoringFire alarms,smoke / heat
detectors, firefighting
system, hydrants,
hoses, water sourcewith back up

Regular checking of water gauges ofwater level in river Ravi, Rain forecast,
Snowfall/melt, debris, landslide, drainage
system, Evacuation drills, shifting ofcollections/artifacts from museum,Preparation/updating of earthquakehazard
map.

6. Stages of Agent Control (Table. 3)
Table 3 Stages of Agent Control

S. No.

92

FIRE

FLOOD

1

Avoid

COMPONENT

Fire through continuous
monitoring andmaintenance of fire
prevention and fighting
system, anti lightening
measures.

Through survey and rising of the floodprone area of the fort, weather forecast.
Snowfall/melt and water level monitoringchoking of drainage system.

2

Block

Anti fire coating inMuseum, plantationof trees, water shield,
separation of materials.

By planting trees around the fort and in
the vicinity. Protection bunds, spurs.

3

DetectRegular check up on
source of fire and theirseparation/removal
accordingly.

Through water Gauges, forecast, Early
Warning system

4

Response

Internally and Rescue
Services

Shifting of collections/artifacts from themuseum if flooding is likely to affect themuseum.

5

Recover / Treat

The damaged / lost
property value

The affect area/part/articles, redress the
weak points

3.3 Lahore Fort

7. Recovery Plan (Fig. 3)

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

Fig. 3 Recovery Plan

93

3.4 The Disaster Risk Management Plan for the Krak des Chevaliers(Alhosn Castle) in Syria - It had an impact both in the East and in the West
Hussain Aziz SALEH
Head of the Scientific Research Commission Department,
Higher Commission for Scientific Research, Damascus, Syria

1. Introduction
The Krak des Chevaliers, also Crac des Chevaliers (French for "Fortress of Knights"; Arabic: Qala'at
Al-Hosn) is widely recognised as archetypal Crusader castle in Syria (near the city of Homs), andone of the most important preserved medieval castles in the world as shown in Fig. 1. The castle
has two parts: an outside wall with 13 towers and an inside wall and keep as shown in Fig. 2. The
two parts are separated by a moat which was used to fill the baths and water the horses. During an
external attack, this moat is filled with water and used as trench for defense. The castle represents
the most significant example illustrating the exchange of influences and documenting the evolutionof fortified architecture in the Near East during the Byzantine, Crusader and Islamic periods. There
are generally two major campaigns fortification site, the campaign Hospital (1142-1271) andthe campaign of the Mamluks (1271-1300). It ranks among the best-preserved examples of the
Crusader castles and is located on hill top a 650-metre-high dominating visually the surrounding
landscape. Since 2006, the castle has been recognised by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site as
shown in the Table 1 1).

Fig. 1 The location of the Alhosn Castle near the city of Homs in Syria

Table 1 Some information about the Krak des Chevaliers 2)

94

Serial ID
NumberName & Location

Coordinates

Area

Date
Inscribed

1229-001

Crac des Chevaliers
Al Hosn, Gouvernorat deHoms, Syrian Arab Republic

N34 47 11.00
E36 16 6.00

Property: 2.38 Ha
Buffer zone: 37.69 Ha

2006

3.4 The Disaster Risk Management Plan for the Krak des Chevaliers (Alhosn Castle) in Syria It had an impact both in the East and in the West

Fig. 2 The two outside and inside parts of the Alhosn Castle 1)

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

2. Significant Values (Authenticity/Integrity)
The Krak des Chevaliers represents a significant development in the fortification systems, which
substantially deferred from the European rather more passive defense systems, and which also
contributed to the development of the castles in the Levant. It represents the most significant
example illustrating the exchange of influences and documenting the evolution in this field (which
had an impact both in the East and in the West). According to the criteria (ii)(iv): In the history ofarchitecture, the Krac is taken as the best preserved example of the castles of the crusader period,and it is also seen as an archetype of a medieval castle particularly in the context of the militaryorders 2).
The present state of conservation
The site currently has a conservation status which can be described as very satisfactory, and it is
now among the best-preserved castles of the time. The castle proposed for inscription on the World
Heritage List and included on the Tentative List of the Syria since 1999 and have been continuously
protected by the Syrian Antiquities Law (no. 222, revised in 1999) and by the Law of the Ministry of
Local Administration (15/1971) which contributes to its protection in coordination with the Directorate
General of Antiquities and Museums (DGAM) and the local authorities 3).
The main characteristics and architectural features
From the point of view of the history of military architecture and fortifications, the castle has many
unique elements throughout its many transformations and additions interest. Some of these elementsare:① The castle-hall which consists of two parallel lines, concentric walls forming between thema wide continuous corridor arched edges to neutral feature that serves to link the original
constitution of the hospital castle.
② The dungeon which is a set of towers and buildings according to the nerve center of thefortress and keeps together the dormitories, the refectory of the knights, community rooms andthe home of the commander of the Hospitallers.
③ The glaze, which surrounds the castle on the top fronts south, west and north, is remarkablefor the quality of the camera and the perfect stereotomy of its stone blocks to the intersection
with the round towers of the dungeon as shown in Fig. 3.

95

Fig. 3 The glaze and dungeon of the Krac des Chevaliers 3)

3. Risk Assessment & Management
There are several factors affecting the castle such as① the development pressures② the constraints due to the environment③ the stresses due to the flow of visitors/tourism④ the number of inhabitants within site
⑤ the terrorism acts that hit Syria started March 2011 and continuing till the time of writing thisarticle⑥ the natural disasters which are the main concern of this paper and will be discussed below
The terrorism acts that affected the Castle during the period (March 2012-April 2014)
After the return of calm to the area of Krak des Chevaliers in April 2014, the DGAM entered thecastle, and identified the nature of the internal damage as shown in Fig. 4. Some main parts suchas: 1) The destruction of the stairs in front of the fort and the inner halls are full. 2) Partially damaged
in the front hall of the Knights. 3) Damages in interface King Tower girl, etc. more information canbe seen on 3).

Fig. 4 The front hall of the Knights before and after the terrorist acts 3)

The tectonic and seismic situation of Syria
Syria is located on the northern tip of the Arabian plate. Fig. 5 shows the map of ground accelerations
that contained in the geometric code of 2004, which shows the maximum values of the potential
ground accelerations on rock layer during 50 years with the possibility of not to exceed 90 percent
estimated cm/sec square. Where the ground accelerations map is divided into six different ranges
and the Krak is located within the area of ground accelerations (300-400) cm/sec square 4).

963.4 The Disaster Risk Management Plan for the Krak des Chevaliers (Alhosn Castle) in Syria It had an impact both in the East and in the West

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

Fig. 5 Seismic Hazard Map of Syria 4)

Hazard and Vulnerability Analysis
Fig. 6 depicts the elements of risk, impacts, and the two scenarios (the most and less extreme) forthe castle. While Table 2 outlines the recovery activities and procedures that will be carried out,

Fig. 6 The elements of risk, impacts, and the two scenarios (the most and less extreme) for the castle

97

Table 2 The recovery activities and procedures

Recovery activities and procedures

Ｅｎｇａｇｅｄ Ａｃｔｏｒｓ

Local Community,
NGOs

Early term 6 months

Short term 1-2 years

Medium andLong term 3-6 years

cleaning the site andinitial maintenanceSupporting works

Rising awareness andsite watchingConservationinterventions, structural
stabilisation, landscaperecovery

Building and promoting
the DRM & CH,
capacity building, R&D,

Damages assessment
All national related
as each department will
Governmental
carry out its special task
Departments(e.g., water, electricity)
UNESCO,International
Agencies, INGOs,

Experience, fund

4. Conclusion and Future reconstruction projects for the site of Castle
The idea here is how to use the built cultural heritage as a driving factor to stimulate regional
development? This can be achieved through solidity of the cultured wheel (RD: jobs, investments,
research, added value) as shown in Fig. 7. The main points that can be concluded:① Seeking for methods and mechanism of revalorisation of built heritage using a market led
approach② Stimulation of socio- economical development③ Renew interest in the heritage④ Involvement of local community
To achieve the above objectives, Table 3 presents the future reconstruction projects for the site of
castle 5). The author of this article with cooperation from Ghent University in Belgium, and someFig. 7 The elements of the cultured wheel (jobs, investments, research, added value) 5)98

3.4 The Disaster Risk Management Plan for the Krak des Chevaliers (Alhosn Castle) in Syria It had an impact both in the East and in the West
Table 3 The Future reconstruction projects for the site of Castle

Projet 1

Project 2

Project 3

Project title

Management study forreconstruction the site

Reconstruction thetempleManagement &Reconstruction the whole
site

Involved parties

Universities andresearch centres,
national experts andprivate offices

related governmental
departments,
national construction
companies, local
community

Universities andresearch centres, related
governmental departments,
national construction
companies, local
community, expatriates,
International friends,
agencies

duration

9-12 months

3-5 years

Prime Ministry budget,
Related governmental
departments, Local
community, NOGs

national budget , local
community, expatriates,
International friends,
agencies, UNESCO,
International Agencies,
INGOs,

Evaluation

On regular site visits
and meeting withconstruction parties

On site regular visits byinvolved supporting
parties, annual workshops,
media

On site visits andregular meetings andtwo workshops (mid andend of the study)

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Heritage Sites

6-9 months

Raising human and Research andfinancial resources governmental budgets

Syrian research institutes and governmental organisations working in this domin, is working on a
research project titled "Spatial, regional, and environmental planning activities linked with Disastermanagement and risk reduction in Syria". Some information about this work can be seen in 6,7).

References
1) Crac des Chevaliers and Qal’at Salah El-Din: UNESCO World Heritage List, 2006
2) UNESCO World Heritage Centre: Syrian Arab Republic, accessed in June 2014
http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/sy3) Directorate General of Antiquities and Museums (DGAM), accessed in June 2014www.dgam.gov.sy4) Syria National Earthquake Centre (SNEC), accessed in June 2014
http://www.nec.gov.sy/5) Allaert G: CULTURED - reflection, progress and (first) findings (Presentation at Tishreen
University, Syria), May 2007
6) Saleh H and Allaert G: Disaster Management and Risk Reduction: Impacts of Sea Level Rise andother Hazards related to Tsunamis on Syrian Coastal Zone (A Case Study on the Lattakia City).
In: Typhoon Impacts and Crisis Management, Tang D L and Sui G J, eds., Springer-Verlag Berlin
Heidelberg, pp.481-536, 20127) Saleh H and Allaert G: Scientific research based optimization and geo-information technologies for
integrating environmental planning in disaster management. In: Remote Sensing of the Changing
Oceans, Tang D L, ed., Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp.359-390, 201199

4 Formulating Disaster Risk Management
Plans of Historic Buildings

4.1 Disaster Risk Management Plan for Castle Batthyany in Ludbreg,
Croatia
Saša TKALEC
Head of Office of Director, Croatian Conservation Institute, Croatia

1. Introduction
The first mention of today's castle Batthyany in Ludbreg reaches back to year 1320, when
it was referred to as the „Castrum de Ludbreg“. In the centuries to follow, the Castrum has
accommodated numerous adaptations and additions, while the most extensive modificationof the gothic-renaissance Castrum into a baroque-type castle was conducted in 1745. Further
minor changes were again introduced in the 19th century, while the most recent and extensive
contemporary restoration was conducted during the 1990s.
This very brief historic overview of interventions in the today's castle Batthyany does not mention
any repairs or damages due to natural or human hazards, and indeed none are omitted. Theresimply hasn't been any significant damages (truth be told, some misuse was timely discontinued in
the late 20th century, and fortunately resulted in no permanent defect to the object), not because
there wouldn't be any hazards or incidents, but it seems because the object was managed
adequately, so that no disasters or crisis actually occurred.
This, however, leaves no space for slacking, as the environment, both physical and social, ischanging, and new, maybe more precarious, hazards occurred in the meantime.
For this purpose, just as many other cultural goods might, castle Batthyany will benefit from
Disaster Risk Management Plan (DRM Plan) devised to its measure, to become, with time, part ofthe comprehensive management plan for the site. This paper will briefly outline some of the key
aspects of the DRM Plan for the castle Batthyany in Ludbreg, and provide questions for further
consideration (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Ludbreg, castle Batthyany, the entrance to the castle, which hosts Ludbreg Restoration Center of the Croatian Conservation Institute (left), andone of numerous restoration ateliers in the castle (right)

2. Concept of the DRM Plan
The respective DRM Plan for the castle Batthyany will follow the UNESCO/Ritsumeikan
methodology, presented at the “UNESCO Chair Programme on Cultural Heritage and Risk
Management, International Training Course (ITC) on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural
Heritage 2014, 9th year“, organized 6-22 September 2014 by the Ritsumeikan University.
This methodology considers a cycle, including activities to be done before a disaster occurs,
activities during a disaster, and also the time after a disaster. More precisely, these activities are
divided into the following steps to be considered: risk assessment, prevention and mitigation
measures, preparedness and response, damage assessment, treatment, and revitalization of theobject/site (Fig. 2).
102

4.1 Disaster Risk Management Plan for Castle Batthany in Ludbreg, Croatia

The DRM Plan, therefore, considers all aspects of the mentioned cycle, and it also gives
consideration to specific character, needs or circumstances of the cultural heritage in question.
In this respect, the DRM plan for the castle Batthyany will consider primarily fast hazards, suchas earthquake and fire, and just give mention of the slow hazard, possibly resulting from thedepopulation or financial constraints.
Fig. 2 Activity and improvement cycleof disaster risk management for
cultural goods
Simplified, from source: UNESCO
Chair Programme on Cultural
Heritage and Risk Management,International Training Course (ITC)on Disaster Risk Management ofCultural Heritage 2014, 9th year,
Ritsumeikan University.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

3. Risk Assessment
Risk assessment requires several steps, including the determination of the following:
heritage attributes of the considered cultural good/site,
・values (and priorities) assigned to individual heritage attributes,
・sensitivity and exposure of the heritage attributes to the prevailing hazards,
and from this, ultimately, the resulting level or risks for the specific heritage attribute/value (Fig. 3).
In case of the castle Batthyany, there are four main attributes selected for consideration in thispaper, and they are listed, along with their respective values (in the order of prominence) in Table 1

Fig. 3 Ludbreg, castle Batthyany, St. Cross Chapel, wall paintings (left), and art depot on the top floor of the building (right)
Table 1 Heritage attributes and related values (in order of prominence) of the castle Batthyany in Ludbreg

Heritage attributes

Related values, in the order of prominence

Architecture (Fig, 1 left)

social, historic, identity (citizens), economic,
esthetic, religious

Wall paintings (Fig. 3 left)

historic, esthetic, religious, artistic

Heritage being restored in ateliers, and heritage
in art depots

historic, artistic, religious, esthetic (Fig. 1 rightand Fig. 3 right)

Restoration documentation about numerous
heritage objects

scientific, historic, economic, social

103

All of the heritage attributes have historic value, but also very prominent value to the citizens of
Ludbreg, who identify with this prominent object in their environment (Fig. 1 left). Furthermore, thechapel of the Castle has an outstanding religious value, and so the wall paintings therein as well (Fig. 3left). The Castle also holds a valuable cultural heritage being currently processed or restored in therestoration ateliers (Fig. 1 right), or is temporarily or permanently stored in the Center's art depot(Fig. 3 right). Due to the nature of the restoration works and the Center acting as a “hospital” forvarious cultural heritage, the heritage attributes and corresponding values of these cultural goods
are variable. Documentation kept at the Restoration Center is one additional heritage attribute,which requires special consideration, as, in relative terms, its high ranking values are scientific,
historic, economic and ultimately social.
Prevailing risks in the wider Ludbreg region are earthquake and floods. The earthquake risks result
from the geographical location of Ludbreg on two faults (Fig. 4).
The floods may either be the result of the flooding of the River Bednja, which flows cca. 100 mfrom the Castle (Fig. 5), or may result from the breach of the dam HE Čakovec, to the North-Westof Ludbreg (Fig. 6). Damage by water may also occur due to the leakage in the Castle’s piping, or
due to the fire-fighting efforts.
However, the Castle is slightly elevated from the generally flat area around the River Bednja, which
renders it not sensitive to any flooding of the River Bednja. Also, although Ludbreg is located juston the margin the area which would be affected by the (simulated maximum impact) breach of
the dam HE Čakovec, therefore the castle Batthyany seems not to be actually exposed to thatparticular risk.
There are also some significant risks that primarily come from within the object, such as fire. The
sources of fire may be arson, and an incident within the castle, possibly involving some of themany flammable chemicals used in the restoration process, independently, or in combination withinadequate management of various restoration, kitchen or dormitory equipment, etc.
Additionally, there is also a risk of explosion due to potentially explosive atmosphere, which may begenerated in the carpenter's workshop, or by the malfunction of the gas delivery systems.
Both fire and explosions may also be secondary risks, i.e. as a result of earthquake, or other risks,
which may yield structural damage to the building and piping, or impair preventive equipment or
measures.

Fig. 4 Croatian Earthquake Catalogue, BC-2014; view of the wider Ludbreg area
Source: Marijan Herak, PhD, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Science, Geophysics Department, 2014.

104

4.1 Disaster Risk Management Plan for Castle Batthany in Ludbreg, Croatia

Fig. 5 Aerial view of the castle Batthyany in the red polygon, and River Bednja flowing to the right of the Castle
Source: Geoportal, http://geoportal.dgu.hr/, 9 October 2014.

4. Risk Prevention and Mitigation Measures
Considering the heritage attributes, their relative values, as well as their exposure and sensitivity to
the abovementioned risks, one may produce a set of risk prevention and risk mitigation measures
for the castle Batthyany in Ludbreg.
The existing risk mitigation systems are significant, and they include adequately positioned smoke
detectors, 90-minutes fire-resistance by the art depot, existence of water hydrant system, welldistributed fire-extinguishers, audio alarms, and well-marked evacuation paths (for people). All
the systems are regularly inspected and serviced, and are operational. The fire detectors, as well
as existing movement (anti-theft) detectors, are connected directly to the remote security services
company, which reacts adequately to all alarms, and starts the predetermined response procedure(Fig. 7).
However, increased risks, especially at the top floor include usage of the fully equipped kitchen
and dormitory, location of the boiler room, single evacuation path, and possibility of spread of fire
through the hallways due to non-fire-proof separations of various spaces and sections.
To mitigate the later risks, the proposed measures include introduction of the (electricity and watersupply autonomous) water mist systems, CO-detectors in the dormitory rooms, boiler room andthe kitchen, positioning of two discreet retractable ladders (on the distant side of the Castle inrelation to the existing evacuation route; and also one more into the atrium of the Castle). Due tothe possible need to evacuate the endangered cultural heritage from the top-floor art depot, it

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Fig. 6 Estimated maximum impact area as the result of a simulated breach of dam HE Čakovec
Source: National Rescue and Protection Directorate, 2014.

105

would also be useful to have a pulley or a similar auxiliary effective horizontal transport system toallow evacuation of the cultural heritage items (and people, as needed) directly from the protected
art depot. Such pulley or similar, could also be used in regular business as needed, and set up on
demand. In case the visitors or employees have visual or hearing impairments, the alarms would
need to be visual (light) as well as audible throughout the Castle, while directions for all (regularand emergency) exists could be inscribed in Braille on all the doors and handrails. With regard to
the persons with impaired mobility, an evacuation chairs should be accessible in several locations
around the Castle to allow adequate evacuation aid in emergency, though the main stairway. To
be on the safe side, CCTV could also be installed and be available via Internet to the designatedpersons (outsourced security service, and internally designated staff) to be able to monitor the
space at any time as required (Fig. 7).
Fig. 7 Typical layout of the castle
Batthyany (top floor), with theindication of risk prevention andrisk mitigation measures andequipment to benefit safety ofboth the people and cultural
heritage
S o u rc e o f t h e b a s e C a s t l elayout: City of Ludbreg, 2014.

5. Preparedness and Response
Preparedness includes three components: material, organizational and experiential. The material
component assumes the existence of material means which are instrumental in adequate response
and recovery (such as fire-extinguishing equipment close to the protected object, conservation
and restoration materials used in emergency conservation/restoration works on the endangered/damaged cultural heritage).
Organizational component assumes the existence of organizational solutions at both local andnational level, which allow for adequate response, and subsequent recovery process. This could
involve the system of communication and response, which includes the evacuation of endangered
people and cultural heritage away from the affected site in Ludbreg towards the redundant(receiving) centers in e.g. Šibenik, Split and Zagreb (Fig. 8), as well as incoming support from allother unaffected restoration departments of the Croatian Conservation Institute, but also from otherinstitutions nationally. Furthermore, organizational aspects also call for adequate organization andusage of space in the vicinity of the castle Batthyany, not only in emergency but continuously at all
times. This immediate surrounding is used in disasters for triage and evacuation sites, and allows
safe routes outside the affected area (Fig. 9).
The third component of the preparedness involves experience, which normally results from
response during past incidents, as well as from both theoretical and practical exercises, conductedinternally, or even better, jointly with the other emergency response teams, which would be present
in a real-time disaster (Fig. 10).
106

4.1 Disaster Risk Management Plan for Castle Batthany in Ludbreg, Croatia

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Fig. 8 Possible evacuation routes towards the redundant (receiving) locations of the Croatian Conservation
Institute for both employees and cultural heritage, in case a disasters strikes Ludbreg. Image may also
be interpreted as the overview of potential restoration support, which could be pooled from the otherindicated (unaffected) restoration departments of the Institute
Adapted from source: Annual Report of the Croatian Conservation Institute 2009.

Fig. 9 View of the considered heritage site indicating the usage and organization of the immediate surroundingsof the Castle, the auxiliary storage of reserve materials and fire-fighting equipment, as well as with theevacuation routes away from the site

107Fig. 10 Joint conference by disaster management and cultural heritage experts in Zagreb (2013) adds to the networking, understanding andcooperation of cultural heritage and disaster management experts in disasters (left). Planned and executed fire-exercise (2011) for the largest
Croatian restoration atelier (Croatian Conservation Institute - Zmajevac) in Zagreb was an invaluable learning experience for all, the firefighters,
restorers and the management

With regard to the preparedness and response, it is important to stress the importance of therestoration documentation about the cultural heritage. According to the Croatian regulations,documentation about the cultural goods is itself considered a cultural good on its own. And thisis so regulated with a good reason: documentation is a kind of a genetic code of the cultural
heritage. In the case a cultural good may under no circumstances be retrieved from the disaster,or is definitely destroyed, its corresponding documentation holds record of all of its heritage
attributes, by description, photographically, most recently in a form of high resolution 3D scans,though laboratory analyses and reports, and also art-historians’ descriptions and interpretations.
Thus, further to such detailed documentation, considered cultural good may, in the absence ofthe preferred original, continue to be researched, interpreted, repaired, reconstructed, or, if so
decided, its facsimile produced.
Also, another important issue to address with regard to preparedness and response is the factthat the first response in disasters, even considering the preservation of the cultural goods, may
commonly be provided only by the technical emergency services, orchestrated by the authorizednational authorities in charge of the disaster management and relief. It is paramount that theseauthorities, expectedly not versed in cultural heritage affairs, at any given time have at hand asimple, easily legible and practical tool to estimate the volume of the cultural heritage potentiallyaffected, and locations and routes for its temporary, safe displacement. For this purpose, an
initial tool (using Solver in MS Office Excel program) has been developed, which may be almost
intuitively operated and interpreted by any adult after a 5-minute training (Fig. 11). However, thiscalculation table heavily relies on thorough research and adequate inventory of cultural heritageat the national level, thus its 4/2014 version needs updating and further development, to achieve
higher level of precision, reliability and usefulness.

Fig. 11 Simple assistance tool to the emergency services for quickly estimating the volume of the cultural heritage affected, and proposing combinationof routes and temporary evacuation locations. Solution table (left) for the Eastern Croatia disaster scenario. Corresponding geographic
illustration (right). Source: Tkalec, Stanković, Cipurić, conference “Crisis Management Days“, University of Applied Sciences Velika Gorica,
Croatia, 2014.

108

4.1 Disaster Risk Management Plan for Castle Batthany in Ludbreg, Croatia

6. Damage Assessment
Experiences from the recent large-scale disasters, such as the Croatian Homeland War 1991-1995,
indicate that damage assessment is very sensitive and important part of the later recovery, andthat it requires professional and experienced cultural heritage experts, as well as hopefully accessto the documentation about the considered items and objects. It is less a matter of a form to fillin, and more of intimate understanding of the epoch, type, and individual character of the cultural
heritage considered. Therefore there is little automation possible here, as the situation calls for adoctor-patient-like approach, unless the needed assessment needs be fast, on large scale, andwould suffice to be approximate.
In the case of the castle Batthyany, it being only one building, and having the documentation
available in different locations, assessment would be possible by any built cultural heritage team ofexperts with expertise in the heritage attributes determined for the site.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

7. Treatment, recovery and revitalization
Treatment of the damaged cultural heritage involves moving the heritage to the safe location,
applying emergency conservation measures, and ultimately restoring it, including, if possible, its
return to the original site.
In the case of the castle Batthyany, distributed network of the restoration ateliers of the Croatian
Conservation Institute would allow for the endangered cultural heritage of the Castle to be treatedadequately at other, unaffected restoration centers in different parts of the country (Fig. 9), whilesufficient redundant spaces are also available in the cities of Split and Šibenik as temporary art
depots. This (although limited) system of decentralized and redundant capacities may also serveas the support to other endangered institutions, museums, archives and libraries, as well as private
cultural heritage holders.
The first step in (emergency) conservation measures takes place immediately after the disaster,and this inevitably dictates further treatment. It may include conservation by freezing (e.g. of
the paper documentation, or cultural heritage on paper and some textiles), if heritage items aredamaged by water. Generally, any emergency conservation intervention would seeks to ensure theadequate microclimate conditions, for both damaged and endangered cultural heritage, as we as
general security of the endangered heritage.
The second step assumes restoration and recovery, which is generally expensive and long term
process, however in the case of the castle Batthyany, and with respect to its recent restoration, it
might be manageable, given that there are sufficient resources available, which is, nevertheless,one of the main threats to the cultural heritage at hand, at this time.
8. Conclusion
The castle Batthyany in Ludbreg is a very valuable cultural heritage, which has become part ofthe social and economic fabric of the City of Ludbreg, its citizens, and surroundings. Its heritage
attributes and corresponding values are endangered by various natural and anthropogenic fastand slow hazards.
Given it has been well researched and documented during the recent restoration of all its parts andaspects during 1990s, although there is still space for improvement, and that it is well maintained
around the year, the level of risks seems fairly low. The most prominent risks include earthquake
and fire, as fast risks, and imminent possible further financial constraints, which may affect its
maintenance, heritage values and ultimately its survival in the course of the next century.
Resulting from “UNESCO Chair Programme on Cultural Heritage and Risk Management,International Training Course (ITC) on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage 2014, 9thyear“, organized by the Ritsumeikan University, the Disaster Risk Management Plan for Castle
Batthyany, will ultimately add towards further consideration and mitigation of both fast and slow
risks for the castle Batthyany in Ludbreg, thereby improving the safety of the object, as well as
security of the local community, and communicate measures to improve its future perspectives.

1094.2 Risk Management of Gedung Sate as a Cultural Heritage

Saut SAGALA1,2,3
1 Assistant Professor, School of Architecture, Planning, and Policy Development, Instituteof Technology Bandung, Indonesia
2 Senior Advisor, Bandung Disaster Study Group, Indonesia
3 Research Fellow, Resilience Development Initiative, Indonesia

1. Introduction
Bandung is one of historical cities in Indonesia occupied by the Dutch Colonial for more than threecenturies. From the 16th until 18th century, the city was initially functioned as a small trading town
where it can be axis for economic activity in West Java region. This city is located at the South
East of Batavia, the capital of the nation at that period. In this time period, the colonial government
expanded their agriculture plantation, especially tea and quinine, and mine materials extraction
in several places around West Java, such as Lembang, Pangalengan, Garut, and etc. Along withthe rapid development of trading activities, the colonial government of Dutch East Indies started toplan and develop Bandung further in the early 20th century as the center of colonial government,
especially for economic, administrative, and military activities (Voskuil, 2007). From this point,
many developments of buildings and infrastructure, such as settlements, public facilities, banks,
government office buildings, water drainage, and etc., took place to facilitate European people
working in agriculture sector around Bandung area. As a result, the principles of physical urban
development of Bandung City adopted the European Neo-Classical architecture style.
The early design of Bandung was aimed to be a city of 500,000 inhabitants. Nowadays, Bandungis one of largest metropolitan city in Indonesia where it becomes the capital city West Java
Province. According to the latest statistical data of Bandung, the city has expanded which makes it
the center of social and economic activities for approximately 2.4 million inhabitants (Badan Pusat
Statistik Bandung, 2013). After Indonesian independence in 1945, Bandung has encounteredmassive transformation and urbanization, from small trading town into a dense 16,000 people/km2
metropolitan area. Structural, urban land use and social changes took place due to high spatial
demands for housing, transportation, workplaces, and other urban amenities. Consequently, thisurbanscape changes affected the cultural heritage buildings in the old town constructed earlier
during Dutch colonization era. Many of them are either used for or transformed into modernbuildings and vital urban functions, including office buildings, banks, malls, shops, retail stores,
and houses for workers, military offices, and other supporting facilities to accommodate the current
needs. The recent development approach was mostly followed by inadequate planning control
and ambiguous development efforts. Such developments often neglect not only the heterogeneityof historical city structures and the remaining urban heritages, but also their preservation efforts(Ignasia, 2008). This condition makes existing urban heritage more vulnerable and becomes risky
to any natural hazards threats.
Due to its location, Bandung is prone to various natural hazard threats. Geologically, Bandung sits
in a basin of alluvial sediments produced sby active volcanoes and plates in western part of Java
Island. The extent of the basin is about 23,000 km2 and located at a highland plateau of 650-700
m sea above sea level rise. There is an active fault located about 20 km north of Bandung, wellknown as the Lembang Fault, making Bandung City prone to severe earthquake impacts (Sagala
et al 2012). One other main hazard is Mount Tangkuban Parahu, located about 20 km north ofBandung which can be source of volcanic hazards possibly striking the city, such as lahar andash-fall. The excessive and uncontrolled land use change in the north part of Bandung, where isthe conservation are for water catchment, and land subsidence in the southern part, where Citarum
River watershed exists, create higher occurrences of flood in Bandung (Abidin et al., 2013). The
city’s density also make it vulnerable to many fire risk events, about 100-150 fire incidents occur
in the city (Sagala et al 2014). Considering this condition, there is an urgent need to protect andpreserve urban structures and functions from any possible severe disaster, in particular vulnerable
1104.2 Risk Management of Gedung Sate as a Cultural Heritage

urban heritage buildings which are now used for critical function, such as conservation and socioeconomic activities.
2. Studied Area for Disaster Risk Management PlanningThis study selected Gedung Sate building as study area for disaster risk management planning.
Located in the center part of Bandung, Gedung Sate is one of well-known historical heritagebuildings in Bandung and it becomes landmark of the city. Its construction took from 1920 to 1924
designed by a Dutch architect, Ir. J. Gerber. He intended to set it as the main building of other24 planned buildings for new site location of Dutch colonization office in Indonesia. However,there were only three of them -including Gedung Sate- completed successfully before the project
stopped because of European economic crisis in 1930. Afterwards, it was used by Department of
Public Works of Dutch East Indies until the independence of Indonesia in 1945. Then, Ministry of
Public Works of Indonesia replaced its function as one of its branch offices in West Java area until
1980. Today, it is used for the office of Governor of West Java Province (Fig. 1).

There has been no major change of its construction structures, construction materials, andarchitectural design since its establishment. Gedung Sate is four stories building influenced
by the combination of architectural style: European Renaissance, Indian (Hinduism Temple),
Chinese (Pagoda), Islamic (Mosque), and Indonesian (Sundanese traditional buildings). It hasa unique decoration of satay stick consisting six fruit ornaments on the top of its roof which thename of Gedung Sate comes from. The construction materials were limestone, andesite rock,bricks, and ironwood. The building was constructed by reinforced concrete technology making it
resists to earthquake. Gedung Sate was built on 27.000 m2 of land space, 10.000 m2 of built area
and consisting of basement 3.000 m2, first floor 4.000 m2, second floor 3.000 m2, and tower floor
205 m2. Nowadays, Gedung Sate is surrounded mainly by commercial service as well as private
and government office use while middle-income residence with European classic architectural
style can be found in the south part of the buildings.
The building has been hit by several major earthquakes, such as Tasikmalaya Earthquake 2009(7.3 Richter scale), Pangandaran Earthquake 2006 (6.8 Richter scale), and Yogyakarta Earthquake
2009 (5.9 Richter scale). Volcanic ash fall produced by volcanic eruptions in West Java region also
struck the building and disrupted activities inside the building, such as Mount Tangkuban Parahu(1929), Mount Galunggung (1980), and Mount Merapi (2010). In recent years, the surrounding areaof Gedung Sate is frequently flooded due to drainage problems. However, no substantial damage
and losses to Gedung Sate due to those events was reported (Fig. 2).

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Fig. 1 Study Area Location in Bandung Metropolitan Area, Indonesia

111Fig. 2 Gedung Sate When Constructed (1924) and Gedung Sate Today (2014)

3. Main attributes and values of the Study Site
Based on from observation, in-depth interview with building management spoke person, andexisting literature, the main attributes and values of Gedung Sate can be categorized as describedin table 1 below. One attribute can also involve more than one value, such as the Satay and
Pagoda tower. It has architectural value that gives a unique architectural style combination
between Indonesia and Chinese style which are rare to be found in Indonesia. In the other side, it
contains of social value that has become the symbol of the province (Table 1).
Table 1 Main Attribute of Gedung Sate

Attribute
Satay and
PagodaTower

Type

Immovable Architectural: the Pagoda Tower is
one of its kind in Indonesia.
Tangible
Social: The first building that used
Culturalthis shape of tower and therefore
it has become the symbol of theprovince.

Collection Movable
Intangible
Cultural

112

Associated Value

Cultural: It has several collectionof West Java Province, from old
weapons, fabrics, puppets.
Social: Visitors can come to see thisplace and learn about the culturesof West Java (Sundanese) People.
However, only few visitors know thisplace.

WoodenWall

Immovable Architectural: Wooden wall adds thehistorical value of the building makes
Tangiblethe building looks beautiful
Cultural

Library

MovableIntangible
CulturalCultural: Old archives anddocuments of West Java Province,such as books, maps and photos
Social: Visitors can come to see thisplace and learn about the history ofWest Java Provinces

Picture4.2 Risk Management of Gedung Sate as a Cultural Heritage

Bell

MovableTangible
CulturalArchitectural, the bell is quite uniqueand rarely existed in Indonesia. The
material is from mix of Copper andIron.
Social: this is one of the attractions
that people want to see when they
visit Gedung Sate.

Basement Immovable Architectural: Old european,
Intangible renaissance style
CorridorSocial: Visitors can come to see thisArchiplace and learn about Old Dutch
tecturalArchitecture.

4. Vulnerability and Potential Impact of the Study Site
Vulnerability assessment is conducted to determine areas that are vulnerable to natural (and/or human induced) hazards that will most likely be damaged and need to be redeveloped aftera disaster. It involves three categories of vulnerability, including physical, social, and economic.
Later, it can be used as consideration to target which structures, components and infrastructure of
the buildings should be restored back to pre-disaster condition or which ones should be modified
through construction practices, local disaster management mechanism or design practice toreduce future hazard impacts.
Physically, Gedung Sate has several vulnerability components. In term of the whole physicalcondition of the buildings, it consists of some materials which are combustible, such as wooden
wall materials, wooden-made roof, textile-made curtain and wooden-made furniture. Mostly,
rooms in Gedung Sate, such library and government officers’ room are used to store valuable
collection, such as government documents or archives, old collection (books, maps, paintings,
and documents), etc. The tower is also made from combination of wood and copper, prone to fireand earthquake.
There are some social and economic vulnerability indicators that are considered as potential
source of tangible and intangible impacts after disaster events. It is estimated that 1,122 people(data taken in 2013) working in the building are at risk in case of hazard occurrence during theday. Tourists can be potential loss since they are free to visit Gedung Sate during working hours.
It is difficult to monitor them in the building because there is lack of mechanism to monitor andprotect them in case of hazard occurrence during their visit. Valuable items inside the building canbe potential loss in term of social and economic vulnerability, such as government documents orarchives, computers, old collections (books, maps, paintings, and documents), furniture, and etc.
Nearly 1,122 public servants cannot work and public service is stopped for temporary time whenpotential hazards occur.
It is also important to take into account the vulnerability of physical environment near Gedung
Sate. There are some settlements near Gedung Sate that can be vulnerable to fire. As observed by
Sagala et al (2014), Bandung has experienced large number of fire events.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Source: Field Observation (2014), Interview (2014), and Regional Secretariat of West Java Province (2012)113

5. Existing Disaster Management in the Study Site
The building management officers of Gedung Sate arrange evacuation plan in order to prepare
actions required for people inside the building during emergency time. They have createdevacuation maps inside buildings equipped by evacuation direction signage in each corridor of
the building. They also set three parking lots in eastern, western, and northern part of the building
as meeting points for evacuation. The head of building security is responsible to turn on siren andlead evacuation during emergency time. The public servants also have been trained once in asimulation drill for fire and earthquake in 2008. Although the building seems to be well-prepared forevacuation, however, according to observation results, there are still shortcomings that have to beconsidered. First, the evacuation map is not displayed on any spot inside the building. Secondly,
the evacuation direction signage is too small to be recognized and to be read.
The building has some equipment built for monitoring any source of possible security and hazard
threats over time. It is equipped by CCTV (Closed Circuit Television) equipment in several spots ofthe building. Since it is used by the public authority of West Java who has responsible to inform topublic any natural hazard occurrence in the region, such as volcanic and seismic activities, it has
also monitoring equipment linked to monitoring system set by national agencies who responsible
to generate hazards occurrences information. Both are set in a room inside the building wheresecurity officers work.
To prevent from fire risk, the building management officers have prepared several fire protection
tools. They provide fire extinguishers in each room as well as corridors and two firefighting vehicles
parked in the south parking area. Nevertheless, the building is still not well-equipped by full fire
protection tools to deal with larger fire occurrence inside, such as fire sprinklers and hydrant
system. The existing hydrant system has been embedded in the building construction since its
establishment but now it does not work functionally due to old technology left by Dutch colonial
government. Today, it becomes one of displays shown for increasing tourism attraction.
According to the interview and observation activities, the building management officers has notconsidered yet mitigation and recovery planning that can be guidelines for actions taken before
and after emergency phases. Currently, conservation and maintenance efforts are conductedannually but they are limited to beautify the buildings, such as (1) Repainting the walls or changing
floor tiles, (2) Adding/fixing furniture for office purposes, and (3) Replacing the building parts
when it is damaged or needed. There is no existing policy or efforts provided by the building
management officers for mitigation, such as replacing combustible materials, protecting efforts
to save important valuable collections, adding fire protection tools, etc. There is also no pumping
or internal drainage system. There is still lack of guidance on how the building will be recovered
because of disasters.
6. Hazards Forecast
Floods may occur during heavy rain situation since the drainage around the site is badly
maintained. Even now, heavy rain could cause the flooding on the roads. There is probability thatflooding occurs in the area and inundates the ground floor which has a library (old books, oldmaps), offices, building mechanics) since the building is located relatively lower than its northernarea. There is no pumping system installed and any measure to tackle water coming in.
Fire can be ignited from come from any sources, such as external: settlements, other buildings,
arson, etc. and internal: kitchen in basement, mechanics, and electricity. The surrounding ofGedung Sate is covered by high density settlements and office which can be source of fire spread.
Gedung Sate is also risky to be targeted by arsons since its government office. Inner activities
inside the building can ignite fire such as a fire accident in the kitchen and a short circuit byelectronic utilization. Fire could start to ignite and burn wooden wall and combustible materialts inthe basement. Fire could spread to the 1st floor where Governor’s and office rooms on the 1st floorand 2nd floor are located as well as collection in the third floor. Flood and earthquake could be114

4.2 Risk Management of Gedung Sate as a Cultural Heritage

primary hazard that could generate fire from short circuit accident.
7. Proposed Flood and Fire Mitigation Measures
For mitigation measures, there are several strategies that should be considered and proposed asfollows:

Strategical measures①Urban planning. The mitigation measures need to be integrated with the current urban planning
so that the hazard and vulnerability elements from external can be eliminade beforehand. For
example, there is a need to have a coherend between the need of accessibility to Gedung Sateto be accommodated in the urban planning and detailed urban planning and design.
②Local Enactment, Policy. Local enactment is needed to support the framework, strategy andbudgetting. This serves as an umbrela for coordination among the stakeholders. Currently,
Bandung already has a local act on cultural heritage preservation. National law on disastermanagement also exists. Nevertheless, the inclusion of cultural heritage on the disastermanagement at local level do not exist and need to be issued.
8. Proposed Emergency Responses
In order to have a functioning emergency response, there is a need to establish emergency
response team. This team consist of stakeholders of all institutions from local level to national level.
Currently, the integrated system that connects with a wider stakeholders is not available at Gedung
Sate. On site, when there is a disaster, there will be emergency manager to take a role to initiate
the emergency condition. The role of this person also as supervisor and vocal point with the larger
system, such as external aid from the city. Considering the existing management system, there
is a need for City Mayor that can play for major role to coordinate during the disaster. Its role cangive significant command for deploying immediate resources needed to solve the problems. The
proposed emergency response managerial organization is shown below. In order to prepare forany damage or loss estimation in the future, database inventory has to be conducted immediately.
Database can be stored in digital format stored at cloud storage (on line) to make sure it is notaffected for any damage if a disaster occurs (Fig. 3).

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Operational measures①Providing water tank that can store flood water and channel it to lower area.
②Installing water pumping system connected with water tank.
③Assigned team for pumping maintenance and in case of flooding.
④Assigned team for taking most valuable collection, such as maps and old books.
⑤Providing active fire hydrant and sprinkler system that be used to fight the fire.
⑥Assigned Building Disaster Management team for hydrant maintenance and in case of fire.
⑦Calling for the police and firefighter team when needed.
⑧Appointing an officer who is responsible for observing flood occurrence and switching off theelectricity when needed.
⑨Conducting flood and fire drill and assignment for public servants.
⑩Involving local departments, such as Public Work, Archeology, Disaster Management Agency,
Environmental Agency, etc., for protecting the building.
⑪Drainage construction and maintenance.
⑫Moving some valuable collection to the 3rd Floor.

115

Fig. 3 Emergency responses organization chart

For emergency plan, the following standard operating procedure:①After a fire alarm sounds②Call Emergency Response Team
③Office Manager check fire panel to determine the location and call the nearest person to assess
the need to evacuate the building.
④Office Manager verifies if evacuation is needed.
⑤Every room must be checked to ensure that all people safely exit.
⑥Reassure visitors will be safely evacuated.
⑦Everyone leaving the building must meet in the temporary evacuation shelter.
⑧Manager ensures all employees are accounted for.
⑨Once everyone is evacuated, the building is not to be re-entered.
⑩In case of fire, call: 113 for fire, call 022-7800166 for police and Ambulance 118.
⑪Fire truck/fire fighters come from the south east of the City.
⑫Paramedic to take care injured people because of smoke, fire, and injury.
⑬Police will close surrounding roads to avoid chaos and crowds to see the scene.
9. Recovery Planning
As a disaster sometimes unavoidable, it is important to make a recovery planning before hand. In
this proposal, three terms of recovery planning are proposed.
Short Term:・Baseline Rule: Restore to the condition when it was built in 1920, with the approached taken by
Dutch Architects. Consult with building plan
・Team Organization: Activate the team organization, divide the tasks, and make a plan of recovery
in term of technique, materials and budget
・Material and Storage. Store the movable items at a designated place. Used old materials thatare still good
Medium Term:
・Clean Up & Preparation for Construction: Clean up of the area (takes about 3 months).
Construction of wall to start the construction work.
・Structure. Reconstruction of the structure (1 – 1.5 years).
・Roof. Used the same or similar materials with and ability to withstand fire for about 10’ (6 months)
・Painting. Painting with normal color (1 month)・Installment of disaster mitigation tools to protect the building. (Conducted while making theconstruction → Collaboration Public Work and Fire Fighting Dept). 8 Fire extinguisher at eachfloor. Water Sprinkler that covers all the floor. Fire hydrant. Water storage. Disaster Drill with DM
116

4.2 Risk Management of Gedung Sate as a Cultural Heritage

team and also all officers
Long Term:・Integration with Development Planning so that other emerging threats will not increase the risks
to the sites.
・Infrastructure provision that supports the DM system in the CH building. Provision of back up
system in case of the main infrastructure is collapsed.
・Taking notes of all lessons learned about the recovery process.
・Consider and make a plan for other types of disasters: earthquakes, volcanic eruptions.
・Securing financial sources for damage of CH in the City, either through local budget or
collaboration with private sources.
・Strengthening coordination and training with other line departments to take CH into considerationsin term of their sectoral planning and developments.

References
1）Abidin H Z, Gumilar I, Andreas H, Murdohardono D & Fukuda Y: On causes and impacts of land
subsidence in Bandung Basin, Indonesia. Environmental Earth Sciences, 68, 1545-1553, 2013
2）BADAN PUSAT STATISTIK BANDUNG 2013. Bandung dalam Angka 2013 (Bandung in Figures2013). Bandung, Indonesia: Badan Pusat Statistik Bandung.
3）Ignasia H: Transformations and Conservation of the Ex-Colonial Dwelling Settlements in North
Bandung – Indonesia. Doctoral Program, University of Stuttgart, 2008
4）REGIONAL SECRETARIAT OF WEST JAVA PROVINCE 2012. Sejarah Gedung Sate (The Historyof Gedung Sate). Bandung: West Java Province Government.
5）Sagala S, Sengara I, Suarjana M, Pribadi K, Yasaditama H and Mariany A: Reducing Fatality
Risks to Earthquake with Spatial Planning: Case study of Bandung City, in edited book by Anwar,
H. (LIPI), 20126）Sagala S, Wimbardana R and Prathama F: High Density Settlement Behavior and Preparedness
to Fire Hazards (Perilaku dan Kesiapsiagaan terkait Kebakaran pada Penghuni Permukiman
Padat Kota Bandung) J. Forum Geografi, 28(1), July 2014, 2007
7）Voskuil R P G A: Bandung, Citra Sebuah Kota (Bandung, Image of A City), Bandung, Department
of City and Regional Planning, Institut Teknologi Bandung and PT. Jaggadhita, 2007

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

10. Conclusion
This paper shows the importance of considering cultural heritage in the disaster management
systems. The current system has not treated cultural heritage as important entities and specific in
the disaster management systems. This situation is still common in Indonesia. Therefore, this paper
lays out some important references for Indonesian cases of cultural heritage disaster management.
In Bandung City, where the case study is selected, there are about 100 heritage buildings that areprone to many disasters. Further analysis on how preparation to deal in building resilience to thesesites and buildings are needed urgently.

117

4.3 Government Buildings Historic Reserve Wellington, New ZealandRichard NESTERTechnical Advisor - Historic, Department of Conservation, New Zealand

1. Introduction
The Government Buildings Historic Reserve is located within the parliamentary precinct of New
Zealand's capital city, Wellington. The building was constructed in 1876 - an important turning
point in New Zealand’s political history. This was the year that provincial governments wereabolished and a central government was established. The building was designed to provide theoffice space for the entire public service as a result of this change1).
The building is constructed on reclaimed land and built almost entirely of wood. This was primarilya cost saving measure; however the final design resulted in a building that had the appearanceof an Italian stone palace. Built on four levels and measuring 80m x 50m, it is New Zealand’s
largest and grandest wooden building. It is an outstanding example of New Zealand’s architectural
heritage and one of the great wooden buildings of the world (Fig. 1).
The last government department vacated the building in 1994. The building underwent a$29,000,000 (NZD) restoration project which was managed by the Department of Conservation(DOC). A new tenant for the building was found with the Victoria University of Wellington Law School(VUW). The building continues to be managed on behalf of the New Zealand public by DOC.

Fig. 1 Government Buildings Historic Reserve

2. Attributes and values associated with the site
The Government Buildings sits majestically on its own block of land on the main street of
Wellington’s central business district. It is directly opposite the New Zealand Parliament Buildings.
Due to the architectural design, the exterior has an appearance of an Italian stone palace, whilst
the building is surrounded by an attractive garden of rare, native New Zealand plants.
The interior of the building is simplistic in layout but has been made aesthetically pleasing by theuse of native Kauri timber throughout. The hanging staircase (Fig. 2), and plaster detailing is also
a highlight of the building's interior.
The setting, architectural design and the extensive use of native timbers provide the main attributes
and point of difference of this building. The scale and use of timber throughout its construction
gives the building a high aesthetic and technical value. The nature of the buildings history to New
Zealand's public service, policy and legislation, gives the building a high heritage value also.

118

4.3 Government Buildings Historic Reserve - Wellington, New Zealand

3. Risk assessments
New Zealand is particularly prone to the effect of natural disasters due to its location across two
major plate boundaries making the islands tectonically active. A volcanic zone exists through thecentral North Island and earthquakes are a realistic threat anywhere in country with approximately
1500 magnitude 4.0 earthquakes or above every year2).
Wellington is at particular risk to earthquake due to the extent of fault lines running through theregion and city (Fig. 3)3). The Wellington region is regularly shaken by small and medium sizedearthquakes. Large (magnitude 7+) events are thought to occur once every 500 years andvery large (magnitude 8+) events every 1,000 or more years. A large or very large earthquake
on a fault in the region would result in deaths, injuries and considerable disruption to lifelines
and infrastructure. Earthquakes are the highest risk hazard in the region due to the potential forcatastrophic damage.
Associated with the earthquake risk is liquefaction. Much of the coastal areas around Wellington
City have been built on reclaimed land. This has the potential to shift and cause liquefaction over alarge area of the Wellington central business district (Fig. 4)4).
As New Zealand is an island in the South Pacific Ocean the country is at risk from tsunami
generated from either vast distances or locally. This risk is however generally underrated. Evidence
suggests that the New Zealand coastline is hit by a tsunami of a wave 1m or more twelve times
every 100 years. Three events since European settlement have exceeded 10m including a locallygenerated tsunami that hit Wellington in 1855 5).
Locally sourced tsunami for Wellington could be triggered by the direct effect of earth movement
by a seismic event or indirectly by the movement of sediment causing a landslide in the Cook Strait
underwater canyons. A locally sourced tsunami, while more unlikely to occur, presents a higher risk
because of the major consequences of such an event. A distant source tsunami (e.g. from aroundthe Pacific) is more likely but the consequences are likely to be less (Table 1, 2, Fig. 5)6).

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Fig. 2 Hanging Staircase Government Buildings

119Fig. 3 Wellington Regional Faultlines

Fig. 4 Areas prone to Liquefaction

Table 1 Summary of Major Events – Wellington Region

M 6.6, Lake Grassmere, 16 August 2013 — This earthquake followed the magnitude 6.5 Cook Strait
earthquake on 21st July. It caused damage to buildings on both sides of Cook Strait
M 6.5, Cook Strait, 21st July 2013 - This earthquake followed two earlier shakes of magnitude 5.7
and 5.8 in the previous two days. It caused damage to buildings on both sides of Cook Strait.
M 7.1, Inangahua, 24 May 1968 — The 1968 Inangahua earthquake caused widespread damage
and was felt over much of the country.
Wahine Storm 10 April, 1968 – Storm lashed Wellington with the loss of the overnight ferry to
Christchurch – Loss of 53 lives. Significant damage to buildings and infrastructure in Wellington
M 7.0, Wairarapa II, 2 August 1942 — The shock that struck the Wairarapa Region on 2 August was
nearly as severe as the disastrous 24 June earthquake 5 weeks earlier.
M 7.2, Wairarapa I, 24 June 1942 — This earthquake severely rocked the lower North Island on
June 24 1942, causing extensive damage to local buildings.
M 7.6, Horoeka, 5 March 1934 — The 1934 Horoeka (Pahiatua) earthquake shook the lower North
Island on 5 March 1934 and was felt as far away as Auckland and Dunedin.
Wairarapa tsunami, c.7m wave into Wellington harbour, 23 January 1855
M 8.2 - 8.3, Wairarapa, 23 January 1855 — The 1855 earthquake is the most severe earthquake tohave occurred in New Zealand since systematic European colonisation began in 1840.
M 7.4 - 7.7, Marlborough, 16 October 1848 — The earthquake that shook Marlborough on Monday,
16 October 1848 was the largest in a series of earthquakes to hit the region that year causing
damage in Wellington.
120

4.3 Government Buildings Historic Reserve - Wellington, New Zealand

Table 2 Risk Analysis for the Government Buildings

Major threat
Earthquake

X
X

Storm
Fire

X
X
X

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Civil Unrest

Low Threat

X

Regional /distant
TsunamiLocalised Tsunami

Med threat

Fig. 5 Tsunami Risk Zones

4. Vulnerability of hazards to the Government Buildings Historic Reserve
Earthquake
A major earthquake has the potential to create mass movement due to the buildings proximity tofault lines and its location on reclaimed land. This can cause the building and/or building piles
to twist and move resulting in damage to walls, floors, stairwells and the roof. This in turn could
compromise the integrity of the buildings wiring, plumbing and fire sprinkler systems. A 6.5M
earthquake in 2013 resulted in large amounts of superficial damage to plaster surfaces throughout
the building (Fig. 6, 7) and resulted in repair costs of over $200,000 NZD.

121

Fig. 6 Earthquake damage 2013

Fig. 7 Plaster damage from Earthquake 2013122

4.3 Government Buildings Historic Reserve - Wellington, New Zealand

TsunamiThe Government Buildings is within a low lying area of reclaimed land and would only need atsunami wave height of 3.5 -4 m before it reached the building. A tsunami of this height or greater
would have the potential to damage the exterior and interior of the building. It could also flood
the basement, resulting in significant damage to the sprinkler valve control room and the diesel
sprinkler pump (Fig. 8). In this scenario the building becomes exposed to a significantly increased
risk of fire.

Fire
The risk of fire to the Government Buildings is very high given the extent of wooden fabricthroughout the building. This timber is almost 140 years old, very dry and very combustible.
Electrical damage, cigarettes and arson are the main potential cause of fire to the building. Fire
protection to the exterior of the building is reliant on the availability of professional fire fighters as
there is no automated external fire fighting equipment on this site.
The outbreak of fire as a result of damage brought about by either an earthquake and/or tsunami
is a high risk threat, with the potential to cause the total loss of the building. The integrity of thebuilding is reliant on the fire control sprinkler system remaining operable. Inundation of water into
the basement area as a result of a tsunami or flooding would leave the building highly exposed todamage or total loss by fire.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Fig. 8 Government Buildings - Sprinkler Pump and Control room

5. Mitigation
Mitigation measures for the Government Buildings require technical planning and long term
timeframes to allow for the allocation of financial budgets for high cost protection measures.
Close communication and ongoing commitments to a positive relationship with the tenant of thebuilding is required where mitigation work involves any form of construction as this activity could
interfere with business continuity for the university.
A commitment to heritage management in the event of a disaster will be needed with emergency
services and regional civil defence teams when developing a disaster risk management plan forthe site (Table 3).

123

Table 3 Mitigation measures for the Government Buildings Historic Reserve

Description of measure
Technical Measure –Research options andimplement the movingof Sprinkler control
room. (either bystand alone structure
or moving to anotherhigher part of thebuilding)

Develop a Disaster
Risk Management Plan

Term

Partners

Cost

Other points toconsiderLong

DOC
University (VUW)
New Zealand Fire
Service
Wellington City
CouncilHigh(but cheaper
than restoring
the Building)Rules around theconstruction of
new structures
within a heritage
zone

Medium

Department ofConservation (DOC)
Victoria University(VUW)
Emergency Services
and Civil defence
staff

Low

Relationshipbuilding will be
requiredDevelop a response
plan that can bedecentralised toadequately trained
personal outside of theregionMediumDOC
Civil DefenceMed

In the event of amajor disaster core
work may need
to be done frompeople outside theregionCompartmentalise thebuilding to include
firewalls to prevent firefrom spreading

Medium

DOC
VUW

Med

Seek professional
advice from Fireengineers

Operational –Maintenance andMonitoring.
Shifting battery tohigher location andensure integrity of fire
protection system ismaintained

Short

DOC

Low

6. Preparedness & Response
The Building Act 2004 requires the Government Buildings to have a number of protection systems
due to its size and the number of people that use the building at any one time. The diagrams in
Fig. 9 - 11 outline the range of equipment on site and the designated fire escape routes.

124

4.3 Government Buildings Historic Reserve - Wellington, New Zealand

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Fig. 9 Fire Escape Routes

Fig. 10 Fire protection systems

125

Fig. 11 External Fire Equipment

It is the legal responsibility of the Department of Conservation, as the building owner to ensurethat these facilities remain in operational condition and maintained appropriately. To ensure thishappens, an independently qualified person is contracted to confirm the maintenance has takenplace and the required systems are operating properly.
The tenant also has a responsibility to practice fire drills and ensure that staff and students using
the building are well practiced for a real event.
In the event of a regional emergency it is quite possible that emergency services may not be able
to get to this site in a timely manner. In this situation the automated systems would be relied upon
and the use of manual systems would only be used if the environment is safe to do so.
It will be fundamental that regional emergency managers become familiar with the concept ofprotecting heritage values in response to emergencies for an appropriate response to take place.
This is so that decisions made in the immediate period after a natural disaster will not further
compromise the building. This requires the development of a relationship with the civil defence
response teams and being integrated into these the teams before a disaster strikes.
7. Recovery
In the event of significant damage to the Government Building Historic Reserve, recovery would
need to address immediate, short and long term goals.
The immediate focus requires making the site safe, and looking out for the immediate needs andwelfare of those that use the building.
Immediate inspections by engineers and specialist conservation teams will be used to prevent any
further loss of the buildings fabric.
Longer term recovery would require the redevelopment of the Disaster Risk Management plan toincorporate any new information on the buildings response to the current disaster, and research
appropriate methods for repair. Securing and allocating budgets for repair and gaining the correctconsents could all take lengthy periods particularly if re-zoning laws come into effect.
1264.3 Government Buildings Historic Reserve - Wellington, New ZealandReferences
1）http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/historic/by-region/wellington-kapiti/wellington/governmentbuildings/
2）http://info.geonet.org.nz/display/quake/Earthquake+Facts+and+Statistics
3）Greater Wellington Regional Council GIS Mapping Services: http://mapping.gw.govt.nz/gwrc/
4）Greater Wellington Regional Council GIS Mapping Services: http://mapping.gw.govt.nz/gwrc/
5）Willem de Lange and Eileen McSaveney. 'Tsunamis - Tsunamis ? New Zealand’s underrated
hazard', Te Ara - the Encyclopedia of New Zealand, updated 13-Jul-12
URL: http://www.TeAra.govt.nz/en/tsunamis/page-1
6）Greater Wellington Regional Council GIS Mapping Services: http://mapping.gw.govt.nz/gwrc/

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

8. Conclusions
New Zealand, specifically the Canterbury region has suffered significant heritage loss as a result ofearthquakes in 2010/2011. Producing Disaster Risk Management Plans for specific heritage sites
such as the Government Buildings Historic Reserve will help identify areas of risk and suggest
methods to mitigate these risks with the overall aim of reducing the loss of heritage in disastersituations.
Before this can happens more work needs to be done to incorporate heritage protection into
regional civil defence response plans.
This can only be done if heritage professionals and managers engage with emergency
management teams, so that heritage values and needs can be understood before a disasterstrikes. It is therefore essential that heritage professionals are part of these teams by being
engaged with training and assisting in the development of response plans.
The introduction of the National Landmarks List as part of the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere
Taonga Act 2014, sets up the requirement for significant heritage owners to produce Disaster
Risk Management Plans. As this legislation is adopted it will help in bringing the two professions
together.

1274.4 Disaster Risk Management for Vimanmek Palace and Museum
Kaichard RUTTANAWONGCHAI
Klongtoey Fire Station, Second Operation, Fire Department ,Bangkok Metropolitan, Thailand

1. Introduction
Upon his return from Europe in 1897, King Rama V (1868-1910) used his personal money topurchase orchards and paddy fields between Padung Krungkasem Canal and Samsen Canal forthe construction of a royal garden which he named "The Dusit Garden" (Fig. 1).
The first permanent residence in the Dusit Garden was Vimanmek Mansion, built In 1900 by royalcommand of king Rama V. The King had the Munthaturattanaroj Residence in Chuthathujrachathan
at Koh Sri Chang, Chonburi, dismantled and rebuilt in the Dusit Garden under the supervision of
HRH Prince Narissaranuwaddhiwongse. The celebration for the completion of Vimanmek Mansion
was held on March 27,1901. King Rama V then moved his residence from the Grand Palace to stay
permanently at Vimanmek Mansion for five years until the completion of Amporn Satarn Residence
in 1906 where he lived until his death in 1910, Vimanmek Mansion was then closed down andmembers of the royal family moved back to the Grand Palace.
Near the end of his reign, King Rama VI (1910-1925) gave permission to Her Majesty Indharasaksaji
to stay at Vimanmek Mansion. After the King's death, she moved to stay another residence in Suan
Hong compound north of Vimanmek Mansion and the Mansion was closed (Fig. 2).
King Rama VII (1925-1934) renovated the Mansion several times. For example, he ordered theinstallation of new electrical wires and the repair of columns of the main pier at the artificial lake
In the garden. But starting in 1932, Vimanmek Mansion was used only as a storage place of the
Bureau of the Royal Household.
In 1982, on the auspicious occasion of the Bicentennial Anniversary of Bangkok, Her Majesty
Queen Sirikit, who had discovered that Vimanmek Mansion, with its elaborate architectural style
was still intact, asked permission of His Majesty King Rama IX to renovate the Mansion for use
as a museum to commemorate King Rama V by displaying his photographs, personal art andhandicrafts, and to serve as a showcase of the Thai national heritage for future generations.

Fig. 1 Vimanmek Mansion – Bangkok, Thailand1284.4 Disaster Risk Management for Vimanmek Palace and Museum

Vimanmek Mansion is the world largest golden teakwood mansion with its elaborate architectural
style reflecting a western influence. The building has two right-angled wings, each wing 60 meters
long and meters high, and is three-storied except for the part where King Rama V resided, whichis octagonal and four-storied. Although the ground floor is brick and cement, the upper floors arebuilt of beautiful golden teakwood. Altogether there are 31 exhibition rooms, with the bedrooms,
the throne room and the bathrooms maintaining the atmosphere of the Thai past. Some display
rooms house exhibitions of Thai art including silverware, ceramics, crystal ware, and ivory (Fig. 3).
Besides Vimanmek Mansion and Amporn Satharn Residence in the compound of Dusit Garden (orDusit Palace as it was later renamed by King Rama V), King Rama V allocated plots of land for theconstruction of residences for his consort, princesses, and Other wives. He also named gardens,
canals, gates and roads after ancient Chinese ceramics (commonly called "Khrueng Kirn Tung"),
which were very popular at the lime. Thus, the residence that belonged to HRH Srisawarindhira
was named Suan Hong Residence (Swan Garden Residence), These residences located north ofVimanmek Mansion have been turned into museum buildings and a hall for royal coaches on show
to the public (Fig. 4).
Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Fig. 2

Fig. 3129

Fig. 4 Vulnerabilities

2. Disaster risk analysis - Fire
Fire is one of the devastating agencies in museums and similar institutions where organic materials
such as manuscripts, textiles, art objects and natural history specimens are present. One must takeall precautionary measures to contain fire and therefore avoid fire. One must know the elements ofdisaster preparedness to avert fire, to safeguard objects during fire and salvage activities after fire.
The various elements of disaster preparedness are:
1. before a disaster2. during a disaster3. after a disaster.
Fire Safety
Fire is one of the major devastating agencies, which completely destroys objects, both organic andinorganic, within a short time. Even metallic objects such as lead or tin will be damaged by fire. Fire
safety is an important aspect to be looked after. In addition to meeting environmental standards,
institutions such as museums, archives and libraries should meet fire safety standards for theprotection of art crafts.
Causes of Fire
Fire in a museum can be caused by various factors:
1. electrical and mechanical factors, due to failure of air-conditioners, over-loading, etc.;
2. chemical factors, due to the use of chemicals, paints, etc., in the galleries;
3. human factors, such as smoking or deliberate lighting of fires.
3. 2011 Flooding in and around Bangkok
Vimanmek Mansion located on Samsen Area and is very near Chaophraya River .As floodwaters
drained southwards from Ayutthaya, Bangkok was becoming seriously threatened by mid-October.
In Pathum Thani Province bordering Bangkok to the north, continuous efforts to reinforce andrepair sandbag flood walls were undertaken to prevent the Chao Phraya and Rangsit canal fromoverflowing into Bangkok. Several districts in eastern Bangkok which lie outside Bangkok's flood
wall, as well as parts of the surrounding Nonthaburi, Pathum Thani, Chachoengsao and Nakhon
Pathom Provinces, became flooded as water was diverted from the Chao Phraya to the Nakhon
Nayok River and outlying canals.
As flood barriers in Pathum Thani failed, even more industrial estates as well as suburban residential
areas became flooded. Parts of the Pahonyothin highway leading out of Bangkok became
1304.4 Disaster Risk Management for Vimanmek Palace and Museum

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

inaccessible, causing severe traffic jams on alternative routes. Disruption of a barrier protecting the
Khlong Prapa water supply canal early on 20 October allowed floodwaters to enter the canal andrapidly flow down to Samsen ( Vimanmek Mansion’s location ) in central Bangkok, overflowing andflooding several areas along the banks. Although the breach was controlled, residents panicked andhave illegally parked cars on flyovers and parts of the elevated expressway.
The Chao Phraya River watershed drains an area of 157,924 square kilometres (60,975 sq mi).
This entire area drains towards Bangkok and eventually empties into the sea. The Chao Phraya
River itself, and pumping stations around Bangkok drain approximately 420,000,000 square metres(4.5×109 sq ft) per day. However, the releases from the dams upstream of Bangkok coupled withadditional rainfalls, led to estimates that 16,000,000,000 cubic metres (5.7×1011 cu ft) of flood waters
must be drained. This flow that headed toward Bangkok equates to 16 cubic kilometres (3.8 cu mi).
Thailand's Royal Irrigation Department predicted, provided there is no new rains, it would take 30 to
45 days for this amount of water to get to the sea.
Until the water flows out to sea, it must go somewhere. This meant flooding in any unprotected
low lands. The amount of land inundated, and the height of peak flood waters has been difficult toproject for three reasons (Fig. 5).
・The exact amount of flood water flowing towards Bangkok was an estimate.
・Flood waters into the Bangkok area didn't arrive all at the same time.
・The amount of land area that flood waters can occupy before reaching the sea is variable
depending on how well barriers hold.

Fig. 5 Training, Awareness , Preparedness and response

4. Disaster Preparedness Plan
Having a Disaster Preparedness Plan means a museum has implemented action to prevent disasters
from occurring and has prepared by developing the necessary procedures to effectively respondto and recover from a disaster when it does occur, thereby reducing the impact on the staff, thecollection and the museum.
It is a document containing information on the standard operating procedure to be adopted in an
emergency caused by any disaster. By its comprehensive nature, it saves the time used in thinking
in emergencies. With training drills it ensures a quick response from the people involved. It does
not respond to emergencies ? it is people who do that. It ensures that staff are familiar with the plan131

and their roles in it, and that they have the resources, training, and authority to undertake their duties
and responsibilities. This information has to be made up-to-date and the plan practiced regularly.
Emergency preparedness does not stop once a written disaster management plan is completed.
5. Disaster Response TeamA disaster response team should be organized in the institution. It should have the co-ordinator,
conservator, civil engineer, electrical engineer, fire officer, revenue officer, police officer, healthofficer and others. They should be given specified duties and meet regularly to review the situationin the institution.
6. Duties of the Disaster Response TeamThe duties of the Disaster Response Team are multifarious:・declaring emergencies and implementing the emergency plan;・implementing evacuation procedures;・contacting emergency services (fire, police, ambulance) and utilities;
・establishing a command post, chain-of-command and reporting
procedures;・accessing and stabilising the environment;
・assessing emergency services, supplies and equipment;
・obtaining emergency services, supplies and equipment;・ensuring the safety of staff and volunteers at all times during an
emergency;
・arranging for off-site storage and work facilities;
・arranging the transfer of collections to a safe site;・recording the movement of collections;・contacting, deploying and supervising museum staff;
・implementing and supervising salvage procedures for collections;・contacting, training and supervising volunteers;・documenting all aspects of the response / recovery procedures;・signing purchase orders;・meeting with the press;
・preparing post-emergency reports.
7. Emergency Plan
I. Authority Statement
When there is a disaster, the head of the mansion authorises staff, employees to deal with the
emergency. The head of the institution’s disaster response team is vested with the authority to
declare a state of emergency and to make appropriate use of whatever resources are necessary.
II. Policy Statement
During a disaster, the museum declares its priorities to be:
1. protection of life;
2. protection, recovery and stabilisation of the collection of records.
To achieve this, it authorises the bypassing of normal procedures.
III. General Instructions
1.Wherever necessary, visible emergency exit signs must be posted clearly;
2.on hearing an alarm or information from staff, all persons shall evacuate the museum buildings;
3.copies of the emergency plan should be readily available to the disaster response team;
4.the disaster response team has authority in all practical matters for the duration of the emergency.
1324.4 Disaster Risk Management for Vimanmek Palace and Museum

9. Checklist
A checklist is a must to assess the condition of the damage to the property. A conservator may besummoned to advise, if necessary. There are many conservation procedures to rescue affectedmanuscripts and art objects. Curators, archivists, librarians and the collection managers, keepers,
caretakers and others concerned may contact suitable persons for the conservation of affected
objects after the recovery of the objects has been completed (Fig. 6, 7).

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

8. Appendices
There should be details of information as required below to take swift action during any disaster:
1. complete staff list with addresses and phone numbers;
2. emergency response team call-out list with phone numbers (check weekly);
3. public emergency service phone numbers (check annually);
4. phone and fax numbers, e-mail IDs of other sources of emergency support and appropriate
Public Works authorities (check annually);
5. phone and fax numbers, e-mail IDs and addresses of local suppliers of equipment, materials,
freezing services, ambulance, accommodation and services that might be required (checkannually);
6.building information, with plans showing location of water, electricity, gas and compressed air
circuits and all switches and cut-off points (update annually);
7.lists of emergency equipment and materials held in stock with quantities and location (checkstock and update monthly);
8.lists and locations of fire-fighting equipment and first aid supplies (check monthly and updatemonthly);
9.location of safe copies of records of the collections and Disaster Plan;
10.distribution of “Disaster Plan” and “Appendices”: I, II & III to all staff; III at points 1 and 2 in every
room; Appendices 2 and 3 beside every telephone.

Fig. 6 Exits - Assembly Spot for Evacuation

133

Fig. 7 Mitigation Measures

10. in case of fire
Emergency preparedness plan and response plan for fire station near vimanmek mansion (Fig. 8).
In case of fire and mansion ‘s staff can not put out fire.
If the staff can not put out fire then they will call to fire truck that stand by in mansion . firefighter willreach the scene very fast. Even the first fire truck can not put out fire then they will ask support teamfrom the nearly fire station.

Fig. 8 Firefighter Building Information

1344.4 Disaster Risk Management for Vimanmek Palace and Museum

11. Strategics goals and tactical objectives
Fire fighting has some basic skills: prevention, self-preservation, rescue preservation of property,
basic first aid, and fire control. Firefighting is further broken down into skills which include size-up,
extinguishing, ventilation, salvage and overhaul. Wildland firefighting includes size up, containment,
extinguishment, and mop up. Search and Rescue, which has already been mentioned, is performed
early in any fire scenario and many times is in unison with extinguishing and ventilation.
Following is the application of the strategic goals as presented in this column to this specific incident.

13. Search and rescue
Unless the occupants of the entire building are accounted for , an interior search must be conducted.
Unless there are other obvious needs , the search should progress as follows . The apartments on
the fire floor should be searched first , starting with the fire apartments and working out into adjoining
apartments. The floor above should be searched next or preferably simultaneously if staffing permits.
On the top floor the search should start with the apartment above the fire and work outward .
14. Evacuation
Evacuation needed for everybody .while the products of the fire have not yet affected the building
occupants, they should be evacuated. Then firefighter should make the easy way for evacuation.

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

12. Firefighter safety
Self - preservations
Tools are generally carried at all times and are important for not only forcible entry but also for selfrescue. A self ? contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) delivers air to the firefighter through a fullface mask and is worn to protect against smoke inhalation, toxic fumes, and super heated gases. A
special device called a personal alert safety system (PASS) is commonly worn independently or asa part of the SCBA to alert others when a firefighter stops moving for a specified period of time or
manually operates the device. The PASS device sounds an alarm that can assist another firefighter.
Firefighters often carry personal self-rescue ropes. The ropes are generally 30 feet long and canprovide a firefighter (that has enough time to deploy the rope) a partially controlled exit out of anelevated window.
Sometime fatalities of firefighters are caused by vehicle accidents while responding to or returningfrom an incident. Many firefighters are also injured or killed by vehicles while working at an incident.
a new measure was established by many departments that requires firefighters to wear a bright orange
reflective vest over their turnout coats while working on the scene of vehicle accidents. The advent of
this measure was implemented so firefighters are more visible to the other drivers on the road.

15. Extinguishment
Theory of fire extinguish
A fire will continue to burn as long as there is FUEL, OXYGEN and HEAT available. Fire extinguishment
is achieved by the removal of either the FUEL, OXYGEN or HEAT or by the interruption of the chemical
chain reaction. This is achieved by:
STARVING
Removal of the unburnt material
This includes turning off the gas
SMOTHERING
Preventing the oxygen (air) from combining with the fuelThis is how a fire blanket works
Cooling
Reducing the temperature of the burning material to below its ignition point.
Adding water to a Class A (solid combustible) fire does thisFirefighter team should decide the best way to put out fire by depend on situation andequipment or etc.
13516. Ventilation
Ventilation is an important part of structural firefighting tactics, and involves the expulsion of heatand smoke from a fire building, permitting the firefighters to more easily and safely find trapped
individuals and attack the fire. If a large fire is not properly ventilated, not only will it be much harder
to fight, but it could also build up enough poorly burned smoke to create a smoke explosion or
enough heat to create aflashover. Contrarily, poorly placed or timed ventilation may increase thefire's air supply, causing it to grow and spread rapidly. The flashover may cause the temperatureinside the building to peak at over 1000 °C (1850 °F).
Mechanical fans can be used to provide positive ventilation when used in tandem with either existing
openings such as windows , skylight or heat/smoke vents on the roof. However firefighter teamcan send rescue team by using guide line for go in the smoke room and open the window for good
ventilation.
17. Recovery planning - fire
Immediate Term
Stabilize the situation.
Assess structure and determine condition, safe for access, etc.
Short Term
begin to recovery working with restoration/conservation expert.
Long-term recovery plan
・Incorporate ‘lessons learned’・Give knowledge to fire fighter and communities about cultural heritage.
・Complete and thorough assessment of the community’s permanent recovery needs.
・Continued training of:- The mansion ‘s staff- the fire dept regarding pre-planning and regular inspections
18. Knowledge about cultural heritage
The important is knowledge of Firefighter in cultural heritage . Firefighter should have knowledge
about vimanmek mansion . they have to know that how important of antiques in palace and also
know the area around vimanmek mansion because when in case of fire they can set up ladder truck,water truck for working. Sometimes we can not set up fire engine in the narrow street . excellent
firefighters are very good for work in worst case because in case of fire Eventhough they can not
put out fire atleast they can decide to bring important antiques from fire.

136

4.4 Disaster Risk Management for Vimanmek Palace and Museum

19. Flooding (Fig. 9)
preparing
・Preparing water pump・Store valuables at upper levels
・checking drainage system around mansion., preparing equipment for flooding.
recovery・Assess damage to structure
・Assess damage to building
・Stabilize the situation
・Continue pumping out water・Call conservator/restoration expert to assess impact on heritage aspects.
・Implement plan to save/conserve/restore heritage.
・Work with local community in recovering the mansion and the local community areas.

References
1）Commissioner of museums government of Tamil Nadu india, R.
2）James Angel: Firefighting strategies and tactics
3）Wikipedia

Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plans of Historic Buildings

Fig. 9137

Appendix

List of Resource
Persons(As of 2014 September)
Kozo WATANABE
Vice Chancellor,
Ritsumeikan University
Kenzo TOKI
Professor,
Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban
Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University(R-DMUCH)
Rohit JIGYASUUNESCO Chair Holder ,President of ICCOMOS-ICORP,
Professor,
Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban
Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University(R-DMUCH)
Masafumi YAMASAKI
Professor,
Department of Architecture and Urban
Design, College of Science and Engineering,
Ritsumeikan University
Noriyoshi TSURUOKAManager,
Cultural Asset Division, Board of Education,
Kyoto Prefecture
Kazuyuki IZUNO
Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering, Collegeof Science and Engineering, Ritsumeikan
University
Masamitsu FUJIMOTO
Assistant Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering, Collegeof Science and Engineering, Ritsumeikan
University
Takeyuki OKUBO
Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering, Collegeof Science and Engineering, Ritsumeikan
University
Director,
Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban
Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University(R-DMUCH)
Sebastian MOFFATT
140

President and CEO,CONSENSUS Institute Inc.
Rajib SHAW
Professor,
Graduate School of Global Environmental
Studies, Kyoto University
Ryoichi FUKAGAWA
Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering, Collegeof Science and Engineering, Ritsumeikan
University
Sibel Yildirim ESEN
Conservation Architect, Culture and Tourism
Expert,Ministry of Culture and Tourism
Kenji SAWAI
Professor Emeritus,
Setsunan University
Keiji YANO
Professor,
Department of Humanities, Geography
Major, College of Letters, Ritsumeikan
University
Hikokazu OMORI
Director,
Omori Architectural Office
Yoshinori MACHIDA
Citizens Safety Director,
Citizens Safety Section, Safety andAmbulance Division, Kyoto City Fire
Department
Christopher MARRIONCEO,Marrion Fire & Risk Consulting PE, LLC
Yasumichi MURAKAMI
Senior Administrator,
Hyogo Pref. Board of Education

Naoko USHITANI ITAYA
Associate Professor,
Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban
Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University(R-DMUCH)

Sang sun JO
Senior Researcher,
Naju National Research Institute of Cultural
Heritage, Cultural Heritage Administration of
KOREA

Yoshihiro HIRAOKA
Professor,
Architecture Design Laboratory, Departmentof Design Information, Miyagi University

Joseph Allan KING
Director of the Sites Unit,
ICCROM

Mayumi KUDO
Senior priest,
Kaminoyama Hachiman-gu Shrine
Kazuma GOTO
Fukkou Minasan-kai (Local community forearthquake disaster reconstruction)

Qing WEI
Executive Director,
Cultural Heritage Conservation Center of
Beijing Guowenyan Co., Ltd.
Kumiko SHIMOTSUMA
Senior Cultural Properties Specialist,
Cultural Properties Department, Agency for
Cultural Affairs
Hatthaya SIRIPHATTHANAKUN
Landscape architect (conservation),
Office of Architecture, Fine Arts Department,
Ministry of Culture, Thailand
Zeynep GUL UNAL
Assistant Prof. Dr,
Faculty of Architecture, Restoration
Department, Yildiz Technical University

Jerry VELASQUEZ
Chief of Section, Advocacy and Outreach,
UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction(UNISDR)
Giovanni BOCCARDI
Focal Point Officer, Chief, Emergency
Preparedness and Response Unit, UNESCO
on Sustainable Development and Disaster
Risk Reduction, UNESCO WHC

Appendix

Wesley CHEEK
Urban Studies Pre-Doctoral Fellow,
City, Culture and Community, Tulane
University

Akatsuki TAKAHASHI
Programme Specialist for Culture,
UNESCO Office for the Pacific States (Apia,
Samoa)

Yuko ISHIDA
Senior Researcher,
Kinugasa Research Organization,
Ritsumeikan University
Dowon KIM
Senior Researcher,
Kinugasa Research Organization,
Ritsumeikan University
Mingji CUI
Senior Researcher,
Kinugasa Research Organization,
Ritsumeikan University
Mayuko YONEJIMA
Senior Researcher,
Ritsumeikan Global Innovation Research
Organization, Ritsumeikan University141

List of Participants
Elena MAMANI, Albania
Project Manager,
Deputy Head of Office, Cultural Heritage
without Borders (CHwB)
Catherine FORBES, Australia
Built Heritage Advisor,
GML Heritage; Australia Institute ofArchitects, Australia ICOMOS
Sasa TKALEC, Croatia
Head of Office of Director,
Croatian Conservation Institute
Juan Diego BADILLO REYES, Ecuador
Architect Conservator freelance,
Volunteer South America Coordinator
Abdelhamid SAYED, Egypt
Chairman,
Conservator in the Ministry of Antiquities,
Egyptian Heritage Rescue Foundation(EHRF);
Training & Capacity Building Unit Manager,
Egyptian Earth Construction Association(EECA)
Anaseini KALOUGATA, The Fiji Islands
Senior Project Officer Levuka,
Department of National Heritage, Cultureand Arts
Cinthia CABALLERO, Honduras
Urban control and planification unit,
Alcaldia Municipal Del Distrito Central(Gerencia Del Centro Historico)142

Jyoti PANDEY SHARMA, India
Professor,
Department of Architecture, Deenbandhu
Chhotu Ram University of Science &Technology
Saut SAGALA, Indonesia
Senior Fellow,
Resilience Development Initiative
Alaa HAMDON, Iraq
University Lecturer,
Researcher and Earthquake Expert, Remote
Sensing Center, Mosul University
Richard NESTER, New ZealandTechnical Advisor - Historic,
Department of Conservation
Zafar SHAH, Pakistan
Regional Emergency Officer,
Punjab Emergency Service (Rescue 1122),
Chowk Kumharanwala, Multan, Punjab
Hussain SALEH, Syria
Head of the scientific research commissions
department,
Higher Commission for Scientific Research
Kaichard RUTTANAWONGCHAI, Thailand
Captain assistant, Klongtoey fire station,
second operation, fire department, Bangkok
metropolitanPhotos of ITC 2014

Opening address given by theVice Chancellor, Ritsumeikan
University

Congratulatory address givenby the Toyota Foundation

The first Group Photoby the trainees and Lecturers of ITC2014

Appendix

Site investigation of wooden heritage buildings at
Kiyomizu-Dera Temple

Field work for Risk Assessment at Sannei-Zaka Important
Preservation District and there surroundings

Workshop for Impact of Disaster on Cultural Heritage

Observing Disaster Prevention Facilities for Cultural Assets
at Ninna-ji Temple

143Site Visit at Kobe to learn the recovery from the HanshinAwaji Earthquake, 1995

Workshop at the Minami-Sanriku- Cho disaster affected areaby the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami

Resource Person from UNESCO WHS, Dr. Giovanni
BOCCARDI

Resource Person from ICCROM, Dr. Joseph Allan KING

Case Study Project of “Cultural Heritage Disaster Prevention Plans” prepared by the participants

Presentation of completion certificates to the participants

144

The last group photo of ITC2014 with the Experts ofInternational Organizations

Former Town Center of Minami-Sanriku-Cho Tsunami affected area.
3 years passed from East Japan Earthquake, new roads are constructing on the old land.